‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
‘To Stop the Multiplication of the Unfit’
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2012
If you aren’t creeped out by the No Birth Control Left Behind rhetoric of the White House and Planned Parenthood, you aren’t listening closely enough. The anesthetic of progressive benevolence always dulls the senses. Wake up.
When a bunch of wealthy white women and elite Washington bureaucrats defend the trampling of religious liberties in the name of “increased access” to “reproductive services” for “poor” women, the ghost of Margaret Sanger is cackling.
As she wrote in her autobiography, Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in 1916 “to stop the multiplication of the unfit.” This, she boasted, would be “the most important and greatest step towards race betterment.” While she oversaw the mass murder of black babies, Sanger cynically recruited minority activists to front her death racket. She conspired with eugenics financier and businessman Clarence Gamble to “hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities” to sell their genocidal policies as community health and welfare services.
Outright murder wouldn’t sell. But wrapping it under the egalitarian cloak of “women’s health” — and adorning it with the moral authority of black churches — would. Sanger and Gamble called their deadly campaign “The Negro Project.”
In other writings, historian Mike Perry found, Sanger attacked programs that provided “medical and nursing facilities to slum mothers” because they “facilitate the function of maternity” when “the absolute necessity is to discourage it.” In an essay included in her writing collection held by the Library of Congress, Sanger urged her abortion clinic colleagues to “breed a race of thoroughbreds.” Nationwide “birth control bureaus” would propagate the proper “science of breeding” to stop impoverished, non-white women from “breeding like weeds.”
Speaking with CBS veteran journalist Mike Wallace in 1957, long after her racist views had supposedly mellowed, Sanger again revealed her true colors: “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.”
Sanger also elaborated on her anti-Catholic animus, telling one of Wallace’s reporters that New York Catholics had no right to protest the use of their tax dollars for birth city birth-control programs: “(I)t’s not only wrong, it should be made illegal for any religious group to prohibit dissemination of birth control — even among its own members.” When Wallace pressed her (“In other words, you would like to see the government legislate religious beliefs in a certain sense?”), Sanger laughed nervously and disavowed the remarks.
Fast forward: Five decades and 16 million aborted black babies later, Planned Parenthood’s insidious agenda has migrated from inner-city “birth control bureaus” to public school-based health clinics to the White House — forcibly funded with taxpayer dollars just as Sanger championed.
Several undercover stings by Live Action, pro-life documentarians, have exposed Planned Parenthood staff accepting donations over the years from callers posing as eugenics cheerleaders who wanted to earmark their contributions for the cause of aborting minority babies. “We can definitely designate it for an African-American,” a Tulsa, Okla., Planned Parenthood employee eagerly promised.
What has cheap, easy and unmonitored “choice” for poor women in inner cities wrought? Nightmares like the Philadelphia Horror, where serial baby-killer Dr. Kermit Gosnell and his abortion clinic death squad oversaw the systematic execution of hundreds of healthy, living, breathing, squirming, viable black and Hispanic babies over 4 decades — along with several minority mothers who may have lost their lives in his grimy birth control bureau.
City and state authorities looked the other way while jars of baby parts and reports of botched abortions and infanticides piled up. Beltway Democrats who now bray about their concern for “women’s health” were silent about the Gosnell massacre and countless others like it in America’s ghettos. Why?
The Obama administration is crawling with the modern-day heirs of the eugenics movement, from Planned Parenthood golden girl Kathleen Sebelius at the Department of Health and Human Services to the president’s prestigious science czar John Holdren — an outspoken proponent of forced abortions and mass sterilizations and a self-proclaimed protege of eugenics guru Harrison Brown, whom he credits with inspiring him to become a scientist.
Brown envisioned a government regime in which the “number of abortions and artificial inseminations permitted in a given year would be determined completely by the difference between the number of deaths and the number of births in the year previous.” He urged readers to “reconcile ourselves to the fact that artificial means must be applied to limit birth rates.” He likened the global population to a “pulsating mass of maggots.”
Listen carefully as this White House dresses its Obamacare abortion mandate in the white lab coat of “reproductive services” for all. The language of “access to birth control” is the duplicitous code of Sanger’s ideological grim reapers.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
GOP Texas primary fight: Desperate Dewhurst slimes conservative challenger Ted Cruz
May 25, 2012 07:31 PM by Michelle Malkin
8 CommentsWho’s funding Brett Kimberlin?
May 25, 2012 01:52 PM by Michelle Malkin
29 CommentsObama’s Land of the LOST
May 25, 2012 01:42 PM by Michelle Malkin
56 CommentsObama’s latest campaign angle: I’ve been saving America from wild Republican debts
May 24, 2012 04:33 PM by Doug Powers
55 Comments
Senate finally passes a budget approves bill striking word ‘lunatic’ from federal law
May 24, 2012 11:22 AM by Doug Powers
193 CommentsStammertime: Jay Carney asked if Chicago protests have soured Obama’s support for OWS
May 23, 2012 07:44 PM by Doug Powers
54 Comments
S.E. Cupp, Hustler, and the four stages of conservative female abuse
May 23, 2012 02:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
142 CommentsPig Maher’s boy Bill Burton mocks my support of Hatch challenger Dan Liljenquist
May 23, 2012 11:37 AM by Michelle Malkin
32 CommentsFree speech blogburst: Show solidarity for targeted conservative bloggers; Update: It’s Everybody Blog About Brett Kimberlin Day; Donation fund for targets
May 23, 2012 05:59 AM by Michelle Malkin
116 Comments
Categories: Abortion,Health care,Politics
JustOneMinute
» Barack, Youthful Leader!JustOneMinute
» Patterico And The Brett Kimberlin GangBabalu Blog
» U.S. Manned Space Flight in The 21st CenturyVillainous Company
» Must Read Post of the Day. Possibly, the Year
Oh, they don’t have to as long as they don’t tell me I can’t or face government action if I do!
They can pry my Jimmy Dean Pork Patty from my cold dead hands!
I have a step daughter who is “unfit to breed”. Her father was in psychiatric care in his late teens/early twenties. She has been in assisted living for nine years, since the age of twelve, on the taxpayer’s dime, for a multitude of psychiatric issues. She has beaten the crap out of my wife, threatened me and pulled a knife on a deputy sheriff. She is sexually promiscuous and not particularly picky about partners. I feel she should not be allowed to have children. Odds are strong they would be mentally challenged and there is a 100% chance they would be raised on taxpayer money. In my step-daughter’s case, Ms. Sanger was spot on.
Tip of the iceberg. Read about the “comfort panels” in the Obamacare law.
If you are under 15 or over 70 and thus not a contributor to society, as a “unit” you will not be eligible for most major care, if you get something serious.”
Obama he has a fix for the Social Security problem. He lets you die. Imagine in a decade watching the life expectency of the US drop by 8-10 years.
I completely respect your feelings toward her and concede that I don’t know enough about your situation to pass judgement.
However, on my end I can give you the perspective of a child of one of those people. My father was severely unstable, abusive, paranoid, and a drug abuser. When my mother got pregnant with me everyone said I was doomed to be a criminal.
Life has a funny way of working out, and people have a funny way of being unexpected.
Notable people born to unfit parents include Cary Grant, Dave Pelzer,
Tyler Perry, and Joyce Meyer.
Just something to think about.
“I prefer abortions to having to pay for welfare mothers”
You have a skewed view of who is getting abortions. Welfare mothers get paid for those extra children. Aborting them cost them bigger checks.
http://www.chron.com/news/nation-world/article/Who-gets-abortions-The-answer-might-surprise-you-1787634.php
“Unreported abortions….”
Those D&C’s done as an outpatient in office paid for with cash…..
these people make me sick.
If it’s an inconvenience just get an abortion. Unless you’re an unwed ‘celebrity’ then a kid is better than Chanel accessories.
When I was a corpsman in the Navy I assisted with “D&C’s”. We did a lot of them on active duty wives and active duty females in both Marines and Navy.
I’m not sure what the percent of the ones we did on active duty wives fell into this category….husbands out at sea and had been for some time….but certainly some of them did.
I’m 100% sure they were reported at D&C’s and not abortions however.
All babies should have the right to be given the chance to reach their full potential as human beings. No one can always predict the outcome of one’s choices in life.
“All babies should have the right to be given the chance to reach their full potential as human beings.”
While that sounds good, all warm and fuzzy like, it is a dangerous slippery slope. So who determines what keeps them from doing so and what are we to do about those identified barriers? And what is the definition of, what does it look like, to reach one’s full potential?
And is it only in America we want to make sure babies are allowed to reach their full potential? What about babies born in malaria infected areas in East Africa?
Again sounds all good and warm and fuzzy. But in practice it is another matter.
“comfort panels”
Isn’t that the coverage for incontinent pads?
It is not so much welfare mothers who get abortions, but perhaps we can all agree that almost all of the women who do get abortions are the kind of women who kill their babies in the womb, and they therefore are generally unlikely to make particularly good mothers.
The US Conference of Catholic Bishops website has an article that describes the Catholic viewpoint and includes a link for those that wish to write Congress on behalf of religious freedom. Personally, I don’t expect that a bunch of goofballs that can’t even figure out how to pass a budget can have even an inkling of how to deal with a constitutional crisis, but more power to the Catholics for at least giving it the good old college try.
What does the percentage of people who use something have to do with who pays for it?
You clearly have no understanding of this issue, and are no doubt grossly uninformed and ignorant with regard to countless others.
Obowmao always wanted to be a ‘Sandman’ in ‘Logan’s Run’!
Logan 5: Killed? Why do you use that word?
Jessica 6: Isn’t that what you do? Kill?
Logan 5: I’ve never killed anyone in my life. Sandman terminate runners. What’s your name?
Jessica 6: Jessica.
Logan 5: You’re sad enough. You’re beautiful. Let’s have sex.
Jessica 6: No.
Logan 5: Then why are you wasting my time, hmmm? Why did you put yourself on the circuit?
Jessica 6: I thought I had to do something. I told you it was a mistake. And I’ve changed my mind.
Logan 5: Because I’m a Sandman? Am I your first?
Jessica 6: Yes.
P.A. System: Capricorn 15′s. Born 2244. Enter the Carousel. This is the time of renewal.
[Crowd applauds]
P.A. System: Be strong and you will be renewed. Identify.
[Capricorn 15's show flashing crystals]
“Get over it already.”
Except this isn’t about birth control. The bigger issue isn’t even about who pays for it although that is a part of the issue.
The issue is a President who over steps the Constitution and usurps power for himself deciding he can mandate things as if he is a king.
That issue, the bigger and more dangerous issue, is not going away just because he wants to now pass the bill on to the “insurance” companies.
Pork….
I’m sorry you have to deal with that kind of thing.
Well put CandanceM!! Just as having “good” parents doesn’t guarantee that a child will be a “good” person.
The creepy thing is that so many people, far removed from others’ situations, would be perfectly happy to decide who can or cannot have children, who can or cannot have true medical care, and on and on and on into their sick totalitarian utopian dreams, the nightmare of millions.
I’ll be OK with making Catholic organizations fund birth control as soon as the Democrats pass a measure that states all Muslim groups have to fund pork breeding, and offer it at their functions, from their kitchen..
Laura Ingraham had a kooky female minister (but I repeat myself) on the O’Really Factor. She kept speaking of denying women “reproductive health” and “reproductive equality”.
NOBODY mentions the number one, absolutely reliable form of birth control: abstinence. You can’t afford to raise a kid? No problem… DON’T F****!
These leftists act as if something has gone wrong if sexual intercourse results in pregnancy. This would be like me in my younger days laying brick, then looking up and going, “Oh no! I’ve built a house! How’d that happen? What do I do now? I need the gov’t to buy me matches to burn it down, because I can’t afford property taxes!”
Applying liberal logic on birth control to gun control: “All I did was pull the trigger six times, I didn’t MEAN to shoot that man! The gov’t should pay for my ammunition to lower the murder rate”
I agree on the GOP go-along-to get-along types. They are not the ones I want running those ads. I was thinking along the lines of a Super Pac type thing to run those ads.
Good one, Hiraghm!
Why indeed, since they are unfit after all?
Sad, but so true.
All I had to say…
Hitler sent some of his people to the USA to study our eugenics techniques (not sure where, but it was legal in places to sterilize “the mentally unfit”), and they took some of the ideas back to Germany. The Nazis didn’t call themselves National Socialists for nothing.
here’s one link hnn.us/articles/1796.html
Absolutely.
quotes from the link
This about California:
In 1933 alone, at least 1,278 coercive sterilizations were performed, 700 of which were on women. The state’s two leading sterilization mills in 1933 were Sonoma State Home with 388 operations and Patton State Hospital with 363 operations. Other sterilization centers included Agnews, Mendocino, Napa, Norwalk, Stockton and Pacific Colony state hospitals.
Hitler studied American eugenics laws. He tried to legitimize his anti-Semitism by medicalizing it, and wrapping it in the more palatable pseudoscientific facade of eugenics. Hitler was able to recruit more followers among reasonable Germans by claiming that science was on his side. While Hitler’s race hatred sprung from his own mind, the intellectual outlines of the eugenics Hitler adopted in 1924 were made in America.
Michelle,
Thank you for your timely and excellent post!
On February 10th, 2012 at 4:31 pm, Roland said:
No one is saying that they have to raise the child they are carrying in their womb. Ever heard of adoption? I know people personally who would have gladly adopted in the US, but there weren’t enough babies to meet the demand, do they flew halfway around the globe and paid tens of thousands of dollars to communist governments (Vietnam and China) to adopt children from there.
Adoption would work here if the children of abortion were instead allowed their Creator-endowed, inalienable right to life.
dososo it’s a nobrainer to support the death penalty to end the existence of the real maggots. yet, the libtard would of course oppose it. baffling.
I could not disagree more, 123 UpNorth. Abortion, when done deliberately by a human, is murder.
I could not agree more, and the real problem is those that not only do not step into the fray on behalf of the citizens, but actively enable the “Ruler”. Those enablers come from both Parties, with some hiding behind an “R”.
***
HI LOVE_TO_RUMBA–#135–good comment on abortion being murder. If you think that 123UPNORTH is in left (North?) field–go to FoxNews.com, video, and search for “episcopal”. You will find a video from Laura Ingraham on Friday’s Oreilly Factor where she interviews Episcopal Reverend Katherine Ragsdale. A “Christian” educator who is responsible for educating ministers at the national church level.
***
This woman priest has made a statement that “abortion is a blessing” in the past. She was just fine with Comrade Obama’s previous plan to force Catholic hospitals and care givers to provide contraception and ABORTION INDUCING DRUGS (not “medicines”) in their facilities. She is happy now that insurers will be forced to pay for these “essential women’s health services”. Laura called her out strongly on her evil views.
***
I was baptized into the Episcopal Church of my own volition in 1953 and have attended ever since. I never would have become a member if I could have foreseen the current abysmal moral state of my church. Many of the national church leaders and educators are actively serving Satan and furthering his evil on this earth.
***
Small wonder that my children–who grew up in the church–don’t attend any more. I will leave when this agenda comes to my parish. Small wonder that the church has lost 60 percent of it’s members over the last 50 years as the population of the U.S.A. has grown 30 percent. They are serving man’s (and Satan’s!) agenda now–not God’s laws. Unborn murder is O.K. with many of them. Adolph Hitler and Margaret Sanger would be proud of their social “enlightenment”.
***
John Bibb
***
Progressive thinking: If a maggot kills another maggot, and then the rest of the maggots kill the maggot that killed the maggot, all of the maggots are just the same. They are all killer maggots.
I am not exaggerating. That is exactly how they ‘think.’ They are quite insane, in a profoundly evil way. They view the world top-down instead of bottom-up the way sane people see it.
Looking at humanity as though we are ants (or maggots) seems perfectly sensible of you are looking down from space and ignoring things like the importance of individuals.
Hey, Rocketman…I saw that segment with the “priest” also. I have the strong impression she is a lesbian. I know the Episcopalians have some practicing gays and lesbians leading their churches. Some of our Lutheran Synods have also gone that route. Be that as it may, what I took away from listening to her was a bunch of left-wing garbage. I don’t care who or what she claims to be and she can wear a priet collar and look like a religious person. But her views are not Christian, according to the Bible and I was very distrubed and disgusted by the things she spewed. I can only imagine the kinds of people who attend her church. Jeremiah Wright comes to mind.
If you continue to go to the Episcopalian church, even if your own church isn’t practicing these things…you are supporting them. I suggest you leave. Just my opinion. I have left mine. However, my husband still goes there, so we are unfortunately still supporting them. He is so active in choir, etc, he will have a hard time leaving.
Love this site. Spurring continuing education along WITH the opportunity to bash the occasional LibTroll….
Margaret Sanger: There’s an unbelieveable amount of material–thanks to Google—that Sanger not only preached eugenics, but that she specifically targeted blacks, spoke at KKK meetings, etc…..Hilarious that the baby-slaughtering Left successfully evades this truth by arguing that PlannedInfanticide is a women’s health organization!
Sanger preached eugenics through abortion, an here is PP, killing tens of thousands of babies a month. Month on month year on year. Whats to argue?
Planned Parenthood is EXACTLY the organization Sanger envisioned originally. They just have better marketing.
Too bad we can’t abort progressives/liberals/Doltocrats!?!
I keep hoping that somewhere, some scientist is working to isolate the liberal gene so we will know before the birth exactly what we are getting,liberal or conservative. Having said that, I still would not abort, but would know that I might have a “special needs” child who must be taught carefully and well in the Conservative, Christian beliefs!!
Top drawer article, MM!!
I hope Jehmu Greene got a copy of it.
Greene’s “you’re only in this chair because of the pill” comment to Andrea Tantaros on Hannity a few nights back, proves how clueless Greene is on Sanger and the value of women!
***
HI HAPPY_SCRAPPER–#139. I have considered leaving–but at present the majority of the laity and the better priests and rectors don’t support the liberal / social / marxist / communist agenda. I do know how Martin Luther felt long ago. He didn’t want to leave the Catholic Church–he wanted to reform it. Didn’t work out too well for him–or the church.
***
My “Gadar” went off also when I saw Rector Katherine Ragsdale. I just wrote it off as another one of my common paranoia episodes. I get them all the time when I hear / watch Comrade Obama and His Ilk and I think that they are socialists / communists. Instead of realizing like all sane and normal people (aka liberals and democrats) that they are just good loyal Americans doing their best to help out all us ungrateful little people! (aka serfs).
***
The best Rector my parish had was a completely honest man–married with two children. He later realized? he was or became? gay and divorced his wife. He resigned as a priest since his conscience would not let him serve in a position of church leadership.
***
And as far as leaving the church–at present I am going to stand my ground and fight. There are a lot of sinners (100 percent!) in all churches. I sent an E-mail to my Rector and asked for an E-mail address for the Compassionate Katherine. She will probably get a short laugh as she sends my comments to the bit bucket. It’s pretty full already.
***
She may not be so happy when we all get to stand before God and explain our actions here. Refer to Elijah’s duel with the priests of Baal–they were into sacrificing the first born to their Idol. Didn’t work out too well for them. Something about fire from the sky.
***
John Bibb
***
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/02/which-republican-presidential-candidate-supported-sotomayor/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Looks like your boy Santorum is an accomplise… He seems to have never met a pro-choice Catholic he doesn’t vote for.
How does this man count as a conservative again?
Oh he doesn’t, he is just not a Mormon so it doesn’t matter how bad his record is.
While in the past, Rick Santorum may of made some less than appealing choices for supporting Spector and Sotomayor who ended up being less than desirable, one thing he did not do is pass socialized medicine. Why would we want to vote for a east coast liberal that has communistic ideals like Mittens?
Crap like gladiola’s post are what’s going to happen to Santorum now that he’s the frontrunner. I’m sure there’s way more to the story, just like there was for his support of Spector. I don’t have time right now to research it.
People do tend to jump to incorrect conclusions without knowing the full story, don’t they? I believe it is because they WANT to jump to those conclusions. That is dishonest and stupid.
It is my understanding the the Sphinchter vote was because Arlen promise to help out with a VERY important vote if he was supported. And I believe he followed through with that promise. It was a compromise. As for Sotomeyor, I don’t know the story on that, so can’t comment.
Gladiola is a bit strange, don’t you think? Where did that troll come from? I didn’t realize we had open enrollment recently.
On February 11th, 2012 at 3:28 pm, gladiola said:
Are you a Leftard Agent Provocateur?
I have been noticing lately that a lot of posts tend to float the hatred of Mormons theme rather than what a candidate stands for, this is from the Swoop and poop trolls that breeze through here. I was trying to find the excerpts from the book written by just such a operative that stated they did this very same thing in 2008 and worked perfectly.
Gladiola uses the phrases “hating on” and “straight up”, that should tell you she’s a leftist plant. Come on gladiola you’ve been outed. Now all you need to do is assume the position of an openly leftist rep.
Yup. The distinct odor of Leftism also eminates from the central theme of those postings that suggest that any support for Santorum proves bigotry against Mormonism.
Disagree with me=you’re a bigot.
Uhhhhh, no mention that Romney won CPAC? Would have been front line and center if the Grinch or Sanctimoron had won. Cmon, please don’t be as hypocritical as the MSM.
I don’t understand your post. Really. This thread isn’t about CPAC. It is about Sanger, and abortion. Maybe there is a mention about Romney’s win on the CPAC thread. To call the posters here hypocrites for not mentioning it here is puzzling to me.
P.S. Who are you? Please introduce yourself so we know who we are conversing with. Thanks!
Yes, I will vote for Santorum if he is the nominee.
No, I don’t like Romney, not one little bit: “indexed minimum wage,” sheesh. Are we to be spared nothing?
But if Romney had done the above (in my alternate world in which Romney and Santorum switch places) we would never hear the end of it. Instead we are urged to fete Santorum as the Great Right Hope. I’m unpersuaded no matter what MM says.
So maybe the brokered convention will take place after all. According to one story quoting an RNC person, the party might then turn to Jeb Bush.
Write your own punch line.
I’m with you Age let’s blow this pop cycle stand and head on over to i’mnotaconservativehypocriteonmichellemalkin.com
…so “teh oone” ‘believes’ this to be about “contraception and women’s rights”…
…without regard to the beliefs of others…
…so “what if” ALL the non-compliant entities (which oppose the mandate) just “close their doors, and shutter the facilities” to simply ‘make a point’??
[As job creating/saving jobs (lives?) isn't a priority of THIS administration.]
Does NOT that “properly” frame the debate/concept?
It’s Sunday and we can already see the problem with making this battle about abortion/contraception rather than about the unconstitutionality of ObamaCare/RomneyCare/GingrichCare because of the individual mandate.
Obama sucked everyone in by first going after Catholic employers and making an “accommodation” (aka royal waiver) to “help” get around the sticky issue of separation of church and state by just mandating that the insurance companies pay for it (thus making it “free”) rather than the Church. Now we are stuck in the weeds having to make the case that nothing is “free”, that since the Church is the one paying the insurance premiums, they are still paying for abortion/contraception.
I just listened to Jack Lew being interviewed by Chris Wallace and Wallace was completely unable to sort out the legal cloud of obfuscation created by the argument it is no longer a violation of church and state because the Church is paying for insurance that bears no expense of a “free” benefit.
Do you know why it is supposedly “free”? Because abortion/contraception is cheaper than pregnancy. That is a fact. Does everyone see the problem? Was it a mistake making this about abortion rather than staying focused about the real threat?
The real threat is that if Obama succeeds in getting abortion foes in accepting his waiver, he will have won on the broader argument of government having the power to dictate. This is a fight for the survival of the 1st amendment and by extension, the very Constitution itself. Repeal the 1st amendment and you have repealed the Constitution.
The only place I have heard it properly argued was on Hannity when he had a group of priests and ministers from various Christian churches discussing this. They all argued 1st amendment.
Now listen to Obama’s defense in that context. He is winning because he has succeeded in framing the issue in a way that divides us and dodges the key problem.
BTW, the Catholic Church is completely mishandling this too. They shouldn’t be wasting time considering ANY offers for accommodation. This is NOT about abortion. They should immediately declare that they will refuse ALL further government funding everywhere and accept the consequences. If anyone should be pure about principles it should be religious organization. Instead they too are partly pregnant and sometimes honest.
(And spare me the ignorant, bigoted, knee-jerk anti-Catholic shibboleths. I’m a Catholic and criticisms are just that, criticism. The Church has been a fundamental pillar what makes our culture possible and continues to be a force for good in the world. If Europe had paid heed to the many papal warnings about the “Culture of Death”, Europe would still exist. Guess who is next in line? What other Christian church is carrying the fight? Crickets.)
…amen.
The MSM are why Obama’s approval is at 48% and rising, and why too many Americans think 8.3% unemployment is a good thing – especially David Muir at ABC News!
The “accomodation” is a bunch of BS. Anyone with a brain and the ability to reason things out will know that. Smoke and Mirrors. Regressives love to change the issue to suit their message. The issue is the First Amendment and Religious Freedom. Period. For once, I agree with Phil. The Catholics and anyone else who finds this objectionable and against their conscience MUST stand firm. This is a HUGE issue and if we back down on this, Obama knows the American people can be enslaved.
I listen to these arguments between Liberals and Conservatives and it makes me crazy! It is a simple issue. They are trying to make it complicated.
The bottom line is this…BIG GOVERNMENT, GET THE HELL OUT OF MY FACE! That needs to be the biggest message of this campaign.
Is it worth remembering that before “climate change” this is how people who had a need to save the planet were doing so? Same mentality….No Facts allowed but those which support the theory. Destroy anyone who disagrees….
Pasadena Phil: Good posts. OK. Lets have the churches forego government funding, and retain their autonomy. But let’s make sure we have some control over what constitutes “government funding”.
The Feds have eliminated ALL alternatives to medical insurance for those above age 65. If those folks chose to go to a Catholic non-profit hospital, the dollars for that treatment should go to the provider, regardless of it’s status.
Same for Medicaide. Government dollars should go to the patient’s CHOICE of providers.
Compensation/reimbursement is not the same as dependant support. THAT is the game that the Left is playing with the concept of “government funding”.
I’m not sure I understand the legal distinction you are making since I am not a lawyer but if the problem for the Catholic Church is that they cannot provide health insurance to their employees without buying it from an abortion-funding insurance company, they could self-insure or start up their own insurance company and fight the battle from that standpoint.But they should be, and seem to be, fighting the right battle at the moment. It’s the pro-lifers who are dragging us into the wrong battle.
The temptation for the churches is accepting an accommodation as the least painful alternative. This is the key problem I see with the various Christian churches. Although they will fight symbolically (daring Obama to arrest cardinals, bishops and priests e.g.) they seldom stand on principle out of fear when there are serious financial consequences. They turn it into a fight over political power rather than a fight over principles. It’s the loss of power (and money) they seem preoccupied with, not the fight for souls.
A fundamental tenet in fighting for freedom is that all men everywhere and at all times are free to do anything they choose… if willing to accept, or at least risk, the consequences. We are witnessing our own demonstration of the futility of “liberation theology” failing right here at home. There is nothing liberating about compromising principles for political power.
The American Catholic Church and Christian leadership everywhere is increasingly compromising away its principles rather than risk having to suffer economic consequences by fighting hostile governments. It’s the philosophical equivalent of sinking into the quicksand of nothingness.
This may be part and parcel of Teh Won’s big picture plan: Cut out every Christian organization that provides social services and replace them with one secular megahuge social services government entity.
My best friend from college had an abortion not long after we graduated. She’s become a mother since then and is a wonderful mother. She also is consumed with guilt over what she did with her aborted pregnancy. I’d love for her to be able to share her story to those who believe it is awful to give women contemplating a cause for pause — a moment to consider the consequences of their decision
Yes! It is a First Amendment issue, but it also revolves around an equally important principle: that non-enumerated rights DO NOT supercede (ie. “trump”) enumerated rights enshrined within the U.S. Constitution. Allowing them to do this can lead to other abrogrations.
A leftist-packed Supreme Court could (and probably would) find a constitutional right to be free of an environment where firearms are present. Since this right now trumps the 2nd Amendment, the right to own, possess and use firearms is rendered null and invalid.
Another application could find that exposing children to religion is harmful to the children, and to protect them from such abuse, parents are no longer permitted to expose their children to whatever religion the parents embrace, however benign it may be.
Using your imagination, the same principle can be applied to other protected, enumerated rights by a totalitarian regime.
My understanding of this, and, like you I am not an attorney, is that even if they self-insure, they would still be subject to Obamacare mandates of included coverages. Shifting it from an outside insurer to an in-house insurer won’t exempt them.
If we fight the 1st amendment battle and win, all of the subordinate battles are also won. Those choosing to fight this as a battle over abortion are going to lose and take everything else down. Don’t make it complicated. We ALL agree on the importance of the 1st amendment. We get weaker when we splinter over the subordinate issues.
True but then it is no longer an issue of whether insurance paying for that mandate is “free”. It then returns to the original battle that Obama didn’t want to fight. And there will be more factions in fighting that fight on those terms than where we are now.
***
HI MYARMIDO_NOT–#156. …saving / creating jobs (lives)…are not President Obama’s objectives. Job (life) loss is just a little acceptable “collateral damage” that is necessary for Him to reach His goal of “fundamentally transforming” the U.S.A. into the United Socialistic States of Amerikka.
***
That’s why I usually refer to Him as Comrade Obama–our first openly socialist / statist / marxist / communist president. He really is the Manchurian Candidate from the movie of long ago.
***
Listen to His video statements when the mask slips and the real agenda comes out. Study His associates, mentors, and picks for government and Supreme Court positions. Note His willingness to inflict severe economic damage on our country to reward His crony capitalists and favored groups. Watch Him trash our Constitution and it’s protections for the people.
***
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, poops like a duck, quacks like a duck–IT’S A DUCK! Or a Good Comrade in action. King George III would be proud of Him.
***
John Bibb
***
Happy Scrapper: Don’t tell me you’re as dense as Palin who needs everything explained in the verbage of a 2nd grader in order to understand. I am a conservative who agrees with about 75% of the content of this website (which I have been following for many years). Yet, at the same time, I should not have to explain who I am to you just because I don’t post on every single thread.
I posted on this particular story because no mention has been made on this “conservative” website of who actually won CPAC. Since Michelle does not endorse Romney and would rather support Washington belt insiders with RINO credentials….well, you can figure the rest out I hope…or do I need to spell it out for you???
And was I calling the posters hypocrites? Try read again.
Quite possibly; but it is “more likely” the “process” whereby the family/values that are “part and parcel” of any organized religion….are further reduced. A portion of my belief is that our value system (our religion); is opposed to the ideology (religion?) of “the oone’s” so-called value system.
Another way of stating it would be my ‘other’ motto: Land of the FEE.
That statement addresses BOTH the Constitutionality AND the weird concept of: As a citizen/veteran I must now participate (and PAY) to ‘continue’ my own citizenship (abrogating my own beliefs/religion to that of the State).
All “accommodations” are temporary because by “accommodating” to a dictator, you are acknowledging the dictator’s right to dictate. Once that is firmly established, he revokes you “accommodation” and all wavers as he sees fit.
ALL religious organizations in America should be declaring outright war on ObamaCare before it turns into RombamaCare.
Nice post. Starts off insulting me, and Sarah Palin right off the bat. Then you continue on by saying you are a Conservative. I’m not buying it.
Talks like a regressive, insults like a regressive, well…you know the rest.
I am not fooled by someone SAYING they are conservative. It is the content of your post that gives you away. I can spot a regressive a mile away.
The fact that you posted something about CPAC on this thread was why I asked the question in the first place. This is not a CPAC thread. So buzz off.
Rocketman, understood (and pretty much agree). My ‘point’ was ‘more along the lines of’ the final RESULTS (end game?); as relating to this thread….coupled with the ‘sock puppets’ ideology.
(See my previous post #173.)
+200 Bingo! This is the old Phil I used to know.
By the way, AGE…One more thing. Michelle Malkin is our Host. It is HER blog. She doesn’t have to explain to you or anyone else why she doesn’t mention something. She decides what goes on her blogs. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else, instead of insulting her and the rest of us here.
Happyscrapper; maybe we should rename your ‘skillet’ as a ‘flying pan’???
Then, with the proper application of force….
Oewbowmao is a man of principles. He is an uncompromising left wing ideologue.
Flying pan…that is what they call it in China!
There are definitely times I wish I could let ‘er rip at one of the posters. The AGE person is creepy. Re-read post #152. Age also posted that identical one on another thread. So, he was really bothered by the fact that no one mentioned Romney won the straw poll. The truth is, I saw a few mentions of it elsewhere. But I think he wanted an entire thread on that one subject. Good grief, why? The straw poll is insignificant, and there are bigger fish to fry!
AGREED!
Which is WHY I’m addressing the ‘holder, of the pan’ (flying, or otherwise)…
We need NOT “feed the trolls,” or be distracted. Focus. (IMHO)
These conversations are wonderful, and beneficial….as long as we are ‘on thread’ AND proceeding to VOTE (as our conscience dictates).
It’s nice that you see the big picture.
The reality is that progressive movements have largely infiltrated these Churches, which is not surprising tsince many of them were founded on selfish principles.
Over here in the USA, the contraceptive movement in the early 20th Century knew that they would never have a great clout unless they got the churches on board.
In 1968, when many other churches had given the green light to contraception, people expected the Pope to come out of Vatican II and support contraception.
He did not.
He re-affirmed the nonsense of how contraception was supposed to be good.
Over 40 years later, most of what is called the first and second world are dying at a near unprecedented fate due to excruicatingly low TFRS and radical movements from neo-Nazis to Islamism are waiting in the ranks.
A couple of weeks ago, I read (or watched) a report making the case that we are setting ourselves up for the most horrendous plague in history because of two reasons: 1) that we are not having anywhere near enough children and 2) the survival rate of the children we have is too high.
That may sound like another one of those crackpot and stone cold theories but the rationale is so simple that I’m not so sure I disagree.
If the basic defense we have against diseases is immunization that develops naturally through random selection, then the decline of the birth rate means that we are slowing down that immunization process.
Furthermore, the survival rate of those the children we do have means that we are becoming genetically homogenous as a species rather than diversified and so, we are not as protected as a species are the statistics may suggest.
I don’t understand this concept completely but it does strongly suggest that tampering with birth rates and “curing” major diseases combines to make the species weaker. That is consistent with the Church’s position of resisting the temptation of tampering too much with the nature order of things.
Kind of like how anti-biotics are a great thing so long as they continue to be effective. But they only delay the inevitable. They don’t immunize and they stop natural defenses to evolve that would immunize us. In the end, we risk bigger and bigger plagues.
Also similar how we address our debt problems by issuing more debt and address our spending problems by engaging in still more spending. We only delay the inevitable.
Age, you made your point, and it wasn’t edited out. So what’s your point?
BTW, for those who are curious about the source of the term “culture of death”, it came from John Paul II’s, “Evangelium Vitae” (Letter on Life) of March 25, 1995 to the entire “flock” as they say.
It is worth reading even if you are an atheist. No one challenges the Hindu version of the sanctity of life despite not understanding the philosophy behind it. “Evangelium Vitae” is worth reading even if just to understand the philosophy of the Catholic Church’s position on the same subject.
Pope John Paul II was one of the great thinkers of all time. And he lived his great life in OUR time. He was at least as responsible for the collapse of the Soviet Union as anyone including Reagan. He was “the man with no armies” that so scared the Soviets that they tried to assassinate him. Just research their reaction upon learning that he had just been elected Pope.
The world is chaotic today because of the artificial imbalances that we have created due to abandonment of philosophies that have served to protect against our foolish urges to chase expedient solutions to our problems. We need to slow down and start thinking again about the big philosophical ideas that make life worth living.
Hey not-happy-scrapper: Your message reads as…BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH ad nauseum.
Oh, and write me off just because I don’t subscribe to the garbage that comes from the all-knowing, almighty Palin? So sorry I’m just not another brainless conservative lemming, that’s all. And since I peruse this site almost every day, I have no plans whatsover to buzz off. I’m afraid you’ll just have to live with dissenters like me.
You succeeded in registering to post comments on this site. Bully for you!
What you have not earned is the automatic right to have everyone else read your comments and give a rat’s ass about what you say.
Troll-speak. I am through feeding you. Go back under the bridge.
Pray tell, Chapstix, what does it take to be so incredibly intelligent that everyone will read your words and give all glory to your name? If you really didn’t care what I said, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. Unfortunately, the libs don’t have a monopoly on narrow mindedness.
Once again, I am (and have always been) a conservative but I don’t subscribe to the likes of Milk-the-Media Palin or Sanctimoron. As stated earlier, I agree with about 75% of what I read on this site but I don’t blindly follow every buffoon who claims to be a conservative while doing their very best to bloat the federal govt monster and vote for bridges to nowhere.
So I’m assuming you feel Ron Paul is void of getting on the earmark bandwagon ? Or is it Mittens?
I’ll take ten bridges-to-nowhere over RonmeyCare any day of the week, but that’s just me.
C’mon, Damnit Age, we’re getting older here!!!
Well, it’s good that you don’t plan to buzz off. I hope you read everything Michelle writes. Then you may become the conservative you claim to be.
If you were ACTUALLY paying attention, you would have laughed at the phrase “brainless conservative lemming”, not written it. “Conservative lemming” is a misnomer. The lemmings are on the left. I used to be what is currently called a “liberal” – and your hateful, disconnected posts give you away. Maybe you don’t even know it, maybe somehow you actually think of yourself as a conservative, but that doesn’t mean you are. It just means you are a delusional liberal.
DITTO! +200
cmbi said:
Uhhhhh, where on this green earth have you been the past 6 months???? We have seen a lemming run of epic proportions. The Not-Romney crowd have scurried from Bachman, to Perry, to Cain, then to Gingrich. And now we are looking to Sanctomoron as our conservative savior. What a joke! The libs are just having a ball observing our desperate efforts to find “the one.”
And you think I’m delusional? If you weren’t so angry you may have noticed this but I guess you’re still in major denial. I realize I’m wasting my time but at least I can say that I at least tried to help a wannabe conservative.
Paul Bot Alert!
Paul Bot Alert!
Probably. But poser and deluded cannot be ruled out.
Again, if you were a conservative, and not either a liar or delusional, you would not have written this:
“And now we are looking to Sanctomoron as our conservative savior. What a joke! The libs are just having a ball observing our desperate efforts to find “the one.” “
We aren’t looking for a savior, (we have one), nor are we looking for “the one”, as the left has in Obama (we MOCK at the phrase, we don’t use it to describe a candidate).
There wasn’t anger in my posts, just truthful observations. Calling Rick Santorum “Sanctomoron” belies some anger, though, wouldn’t you say?