The Margaret Sanger Song
Adapted by the composer from quotes of Margaret Sanger
for medium voice and piano
"More children from the fit, less from the unfit -- [
that is the chief
aim of birth control."
Let's abort our children by the
[ 2 ]
and "reckless breeders" and "defectives."
[ 3 ]
Yes, let's abort those
children in the millions.
"never should have been born."
Let's abort your children by the millions
"To create a race of thoroughbreds."
[ 4 ]
Yes, let's abort more children by the
The "poor" and "indigent" and those we
"The most merciful thing that a
large family does
[ 5 ]
To one of
its infant members is to kill it."
Kill it. Kill it. Kill it. Kill
Kill it. Kill it. Kill it. Kill it.
Let's abort our children by the
The "weeds" and "reckless breeders" and
Yes, let's abort those children in the millions.
The "feebleminded" "never should have been born."
Kill it. Kill him. Kill her. Kill
"Human weeds." "Reckless breeders."
Gods, no masters!"
"Filling the hospitals!"
[ 6 pages, 1' 55" ]
While this song lyric was constructed by the composer from verbatim
quotes linked by a few editorial additions, the sentiments are wholly
those of Margaret Sanger. For this reason, many words and phrases remain
in quotation marks. Therefore I do not put my name as author to this
lyric but rather Sanger's name as is fitting, proper and ultimately
Margaret Sanger (1879-1966) is credited as the founder of the
birth-control movement in the United States, as well as being an
international leader in the field. She is credited with originating and
popularizing the phrase "birth control." After a short time working as a
teacher she turned to obstetrical nursing in New York City. There she
deduced links between urban poverty, "uncontrolled" fertility, high
rates of infant and maternal mortality, and deaths following failed
illegal abortions. Sanger became a feminist who believed in women's
right to avoid unwanted pregnancies, and devoted herself to removing the
legal barriers against publicizing facts about contraception. In 1914
she began publishing The Woman Rebel to challenge laws
restricting the distribution of information on birth control. She was
indicted and fled to Europe, but when she returned to stand trial in
1916 the charges against her were dropped.
Sanger founded the American Birth Control League in 1921, one of the
parent organizations of the Birth Control Federation of America, which
in 1942 became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America. Sanger
served as honorary chairwoman for Planned Parenthood. She also organized
the first World Population Conference in Switzerland (1927) and served
as first president of the International Planned Parenthood Federation
(founded in 1953).
One of her British counterparts, Marie Stopes, acted in a similar way
bringing ever greater awareness of birth control to Europe; in 1922,
Stopes founded Britain's Society for Constructive Birth Control and
Racial Progress. One should note the "racial progress" aspect of these
women's thinking. Among their international movement's legal
achievements was the rescission in America of the Comstock Act of 1873,
which had classified contraceptive literature and devices as "obscene
materials." Moreover their own personal prejudices seem harsh by today's
standards. Stopes, for example, decried lesbianism as a "disease." This
is particularly amusing from an historical perspective given the recent
outcry over possibly identifying homosexuals in utero in order to
determine whether or not to abort them. A "women's right to choose" in
the modern parlance came immediately into conflict with her right to
choose the sexual orientation of a child. Those who advocated abortion
seemed to invest in the cognitive dissonance that aborting homosexuals
might be morally and politically incorrect, all the while tacitly
suggesting that aborting heterosexual children was an agreeable and
politically correct thing to do.
A controversial woman of her time, Margaret Sanger wrote extensively on
a woman's right to an abortion, but in a far wider way she was also
caught up with plans for the societal eradication of those she deemed
"feebleminded" and "unwanted" through various programs of immigration
restrictions, compulsory sterilization, segregation to labor farms and,
for the purpose of racial "purification," rewards for couples who chose
voluntary sterilization. These bigoted opinions are less widely known
than her opinion concerning a woman's legal right to obtain a safe
abortion, which has come to be known by the federal court case, Roe v.
Wade, and pleasantly known through the slogan, "A Woman's Right to
In Sanger's "Plan for Peace" (Birth Control Review, April 1932),
she suggested that couples be required to obtain a permit for the birth
of a child, with the state as the arbiter of who may or may not have
offspring. Opposing other groups for their religious views against
abortion, she accused the Catholic church of enforcing "subjugation" on
women, and the YMCA and YWCA, Christian organizations, of being
"brothels of the Spirit and morgues of Freedom," which is how these
additional phrases find their way into the text of "The Margaret Sanger
[ 6 ]
While moral and legal arguments still enflame passions for and against
abortion, I find many of these direct quotes from Margaret Sanger to be
harsher than arguments today allow. Eugenics, after the many atrocities
which its totalitarian enthusiasts evidenced, still remains a
historically grounded argument for "improving the species." From Plato
forward, selecting the best for "breeding" has been a consistent
argument. English scientist Francis Galton coined the term and argued
for eugenics in his Hereditary Genius (1869). Sanger argued for
eugenics as well, a fact suppressed in modern abortion politics of the
last decades. especially as regards eugenic practices directed at
Margaret Sanger speaks to a Ku Klux Klan Meeting
"I accepted an invitation to talk to the
women's branch of the Ku Klux Klan...I saw through the door dim
figures parading with banners and illuminated crosses...I was
escorted to the platform, was introduced, and began to
speak...In the end, through simple illustrations I believed I
had accomplished my purpose. A dozen invitations to speak to
similar groups were proffered." (Margaret Sanger: An
Autobiography, Cooper Square Press, 1938. p. 366)
Sanger is quoted
[ 7 ] as saying, ""We do not want word to go out that we want
to exterminate the Negro population, if it ever occurs to any of their
more rebellious members." Without question, she wrote of "genetically
inferior races," though such a phrase today evokes outrage.
Running through history from even before Malthus' An Essay on the
Principle of Population (1798) through to and beyond Ehrlich's
discredited The Population Bomb (1968) has been the prediction
that human population would explode and the resources of the natural
world would be unable to nourish such a demographic explosion. Rather,
an opposite effect is now being noted in which whole national
populations, enthused with the availability of birth control over a
century's span of time, are finding their populations shrinking to the
point of significant societal and cultural decline. All this is
occurring in the midst of generally plentiful natural resources for
water, food and land, which proves the population explosion" theorists
to have been popular, successful at selling their theory yet
demonstrably wrong. Politics, it may be observed, often errs; wrenching
correction then ensues, as has been true throughout history.
Sanger's enthusiasm for "the fit" on an individual racial preference
basis seems rather to be proving itself "unfit" in the long term on a
societal level, as demographic decline of whole national populations
predicts declining prosperity and the need for what one commentator
called "replacement bodies" through mass immigration from other lands
and cultures. It seems, with hindsight, that Sanger's enthusiasm "to
create a race of thoroughbreds" -- which seems to have meant the white,
secular and heterosexual intelligentsia -- is in fact creating its
opposite, a Darwinian decline in whole "progressive" cultures for whom
birth control became the approved law and sanctioned reasoning.
Time will tell, as the birth control movement of Sanger and Stopes did
not foresee national and "racial" demographic regression as the
consequent to their seemingly progressive movement. As one
commentator noted, "Over the next quarter-century, the number of workers
in Europe will decline by 7 percent while the number of over-sixty-fives
will increase by 50 percent, trends that will create intolerable fiscal
difficulties for the welfare state across the continent."
[ 8 ], director of research at France's National Institute
for the Study of Demography, said: "Europe is old and rigid. So it is
fading. You can see that as the natural cycle of civilization, perhaps
something inevitable. And in many ways, low population growth is
wonderful. Certainly to control fertility in China, Bangladesh, much of
Africa -- that is an absolute triumph. Yet we must look beyond simple
numbers. And here I think Europe may be in the vanguard of a very
profound trend. Because you cannot have a successful world without
children in it." There is little chance that European birth rates will
rise, so the United Nations has made a number of projections about how
to deal with this "demographic deficit."
In only a century's time, the once seemingly sensible and progressive
work of Sanger and those like her has come full circle, where "a woman's
right to choose" has given rise to a Darwinian decline -- the now
recognized "demographic deficit."
Sanger has clearly written that the eugenic solution to "human weeds" is
"to create a race of thoroughbreds." Such opinions should be
noted, and this 12/8 "soft shoe" song setting with a moderate range for
all singers as show above, is a pleasantly ironic reading of her
strongly-held opinions, to demonstrate that beneath the pleasantries of
the modern abortion argument are age-old harsh realities, proven by
harsh, century-old words.
"Kill it" as a repeated song lyric certainly stands out as dissonant to
modern social protest against war and capital punishment, as one example
of the extreme cognitive dissonance of modern politics. This poetic song
lyric is a reminder that the evil of eugenics might be couched in
popular images but is ultimately brutal, as the Nazi Party so clearly
showed, using its theories to support the extermination of Jews,
Gypsies, the seriously mentally ill and homosexuals. Birth control alone
has brought unexpected consequences as well, with whole populations in
demographic decline, a simple consequence of Sanger's clearly stated
enthusiasm to "kill it," repeated rhetorically in the song text to
emphasize her murderous rhetoric.
Such words should neither be ignored nor be forgotten. Any offence
which might be taken at this "song" should be directed at Sanger, not
the composer who has only sought to highlight her words dramaturgically
and melodically in an "upbeat" musical setting, which begins with an
opening recitative leading to this tiny "abortion aria." For that upbeat
character, a tempo indication of "dotted quarter equals 100" was chosen.
The harmonic gesture at measure 5 is one of diatonic ascending and
descending parallel major triads generating a playfully dissonant
polytonal character, while accompanying a melody line staunchly
remaining in D major, irrespective of the changing harmonies beneath it.
Thus, F sharp major's A sharp competes with the melody's A natural
throughout, and the false relation of the G sharp third of E major and
tonic of G major create a gentle cacophony. This is a dramaturgical
reflection of the changing reasoning which stands behind the adamant
message which has not changed, though the "public relations" shifts.
The short opening recitative features parallel seconds and sevenths, the
normative harmonic dissonances within a tonal system. These more "stern"
harmonies yield to the charm of the song verse itself.
I find it ironic to note that Sanger's "No Gods" notion is in
direct opposition to Charles Darwin's seminal work which she understood so
A simple reading of the final
chapter suggests that Darwin thought quite differently than the eugenics
enthusiasts who so easily misrepresented his views, especially as regards a
Charles Darwin wrote, "Authors of the highest eminence seem
to be fully satisfied with the view that each species has been
independently created. To my mind it accords better with what we know of
the laws impressed on matter by the Creator, that the production and
extinction of the past and present inhabitants of the world should have
been due to secondary causes, like those determining the birth and death
of the individual."
[ 9 ]
Additionally, in Darwin's last words in this seminal work, he
wrote, "Thus, from the war of nature, from famine and death, the most
exalted object which we are capable of conceiving, namely, the
production of the higher animals, directly follows. There is grandeur in
this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally
breathed into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has
gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a
beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and
are being, evolved."
Comparing Darwin's notion of "grandeur in this view of life"
with Sanger's notion of "human weeds," we find the eugenics idea is far
distant and quite Malthusian, seeing birth of certain humans as
To that end, there is now a clear demographic proof of the
folly of this eugenic dream, and this proof follows from some
Darwinian principles as expressed simply by science fiction author,
Robert Heinlein. " Men are expendable; women and children are not. A
tribe or a nation can lose a high percentage of its men and still pick
up the pieces and go on as long as the women and children are saved. But
if you fail to save the women and children, you've had it, you're done,
you're through! You join Tyrannosaurus Rex, one more breed that bilged
its final test."
Darwin made no such political value judgment as did Sanger
and Stopes and the generations of abortion enthusiasts who followed
them, for Darwin's was a conclusion of science, and Sanger's and Stopes'
a conclusion of racial purity politics pretending to be grounded in
Lastly I would challenge those who would be offended by this
parody of Sanger's own words to highlight their real horror to read the
words of a Nobel Laureate, Mother Teresa, and rethink their devotion to the
modern group think of abortion on demand, government funded and irrespective
of reason for all:
"Let us make this year that we make every single
child born, and unborn, wanted. We are talking of peace. These are
things that break peace, but I feel the greatest destroyer of peace
today is abortion, because it is a direct war, a direct killing -
direct murder by the mother herself. And we read in the
Scripture, for God says very clearly: Even if a mother could forget
her child - I will not forget you - I have carved you in the palm of
my hand. We are carved in the palm of His hand, so close to Him that
unborn child has been carved in the hand of God. And that is what
strikes me most, the beginning of that sentence, that even if a
mother could forget something impossible - but even if she could
forget - I will not forget you. And today the greatest means -
the greatest destroyer of peace is abortion. And we who are standing
here - our parents wanted us. We would not be here if our parents
would do that to us. Our children, we want them, we love them, but
what of the millions. Many people are very, very concerned with the
children in India, with the children in Africa where quite a number
die, maybe of malnutrition, of hunger and so on, but millions are
dying deliberately by the will of the mother. And this is what
is the greatest destroyer of peace today. Because if a mother can
kill her own child - what is left for me to kill you and you kill me
- there is nothing between. Let us make this year that we make every
single child born, and unborn, wanted."
[ 12 ]
The choice is to emulate Margaret Sanger and what is stated
openly to be the "greatest destroyer of peace" or peace itself as advocated
by Nobel Laureate Mother Teresa, for the lives of these two women and their
views of abortion are incompatible. I contend that alongside Mother Teresa
and her Nobel Peace Prize stand Darwin's real arguments, as well as most
world religions, many modern demographers, and the truest sense of humanity.
The rabbinic parlance of traditional Judaism, "choose life," and the words
of Mother Teresa, "the greatest destroyer of peace is abortion," are
arrayed against the morality of Sanger plainly to choose death as she
stated, "The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its
infant members is to kill it." Mercy indeed.
The score is available as a free PDF download, though any major
commercial performance or recording of the work is prohibited without
prior arrangement with the composer. Click on the graphic below for this
The Margaret Sanger Song
These footnotes below are intended
to document with sources the conclusion made above. One might argue with the
theme, but one should not argue with the hard data and especially with the
direct quotes of the primary sources, for the abortion-eugenics argument of
Sanger and Stopes seems first and foremost about racism.
[ 1 ]
p.12, Birth Control Review, May 1919. If Sanger is to
heeded, then birth control equates to Darwinian natural selection. She
concludes in advance that this "selection" will
improve the species by limiting a perceived population explosion among the
"unfit." Robert Samuelson writes of current demographics trends, "There's no
more population 'explosion.' In wealthier countries, motherhood is going out
of style and plunging birthrates portend population loss. This is a hugely
significant development, even if we don't fully understand the causes -- 30
years ago experts didn't predict it -- or consequences. One way or another,
the side effects will be massive for economics, politics and people's
well-being. Indeed, they may already have started. Is it a coincidence that
Germany and Italy, two countries on the edge of population decline, are so
troubled?" (The Washington Post Writers Group, 26 May 2006)
Sanger was among those "experts." She foresaw a eugenic paradise, and failed
to foresee instead the decline which it has assisted into being.
UCLA'S Anderson Forecast published an article written by Nicholas Eberstadt
entitled "Four Surprises in Global Demography." (A Newsletter of FPRI's
Center for the Study of America and the West, Volume 5, Number 5, July
2004). It reads in part:
...today we can observe some important
and surprising exceptions to these generalizations. Four of these
unanticipated trends are (1)
the rapid spread of sub-replacement fertility, (2) the
emergence of unnatural gender imbalances among the very young, (3)
sustained increases in death rates, and (4) American
The Rapid Spread of
Sustained reductions in family
size in the context of peace and social progress-were first witnessed in
late eighteenth-century Europe. In the first half of the twentieth
century, European countries unveiled another demographic first: non-
catastrophic sub-replacement fertility. During the interwar period, a
number of European states reported fertility patterns that, if
continued, would lead to an eventual stabilization and indefinite
population decline thereafter, absent offsetting immigration. These low
fertility regimens were entirely voluntary: heretofore, such low birth
Rates had virtually always been attended by war, pestilence, famine, or
disaster. Europe experienced a baby boom after World War II, but
sub-replacement fertility has now returned with a vengeance.
To maintain long-term
population stability, a society's women must bear an average of about
2.1 children per lifetime. According to projections of the U.S. Census
Bureau, Europe's total fertility rate (or TFR-births per woman per
lifetime) is about 1.4. Indeed, nearly all the world's developed
regions-Australia and New Zealand, North America, Japan, and the highly
industrialized East Asian outposts of Singapore, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and
South Korea- are reporting sub-replacement fertility. (Israel remains an
exception.) But sub-replacement fertility is clearly no longer mainly a
developed-nation phenomenon. If the Census Bureau's projections are
roughly accurate, just about half the world's population lives in
sub-replacement countries or territories.
Apart from Mongolia, according
to the Census Bureau, all of East Asia is sub-replacement, as are
Thailand and Burma in Southeast Asia, Kazakstan and Sri Lanka in
South-Central Asia, many Caribbean societies, and most South American
Perhaps the biggest surprise,
given received notions about the Arab/Muslim expanse, is the recent
spread of sub- replacement fertility to parts of the Arab and the Muslim
world. Algeria, Tunisia, and Lebanon are now sub-replacement countries,
as is Turkey. And there is the remarkable case of Iran, with a current
TFR of under 1.9, which is lower than the United States'. Between 1986
and 2000, the country's TFR plummeted from well over 6 to just over 2.
If modernization and Westernization are the handmaidens of sustained
fertility decline, as is often supposed by students of demography, both
terms are apparently being given a rather new meaning.
There are no reliable methods
for anticipating just how low fertility levels may sink, or how long
sub-replacement fertility may persist in various locales.
One consequence, however, is already clear: it will force a great
aging of the populations affected.
All of the developed countries
are already "graying." This is most pronounced in Japan, where, by the
year 2025, it is expected that one out of nine people will be 80 or
older. Japan's prospective aging is unprecedented, and the scale of the
transformation suggests the enormousness of the challenges that will
accompany it. Japan, Europe, and North America are places where people
traditionally got rich before they got old. In the decades ahead, many
national populations are going to get old before they get rich.
China promises to be the most
important case in point. Thanks to low levels of mortality, its
population control program, and its now-low fertility,
China is aging at a breathtaking velocity. Between 1975 and 2000,
China's median age jumped from just over 20 to about 30; by 2025, it is
projected to rise by nearly another decade. By then, it is quite
possible that China's median age will be higher than America's. But
China is much poorer than Japan or the U.S. were at every comparable
stage of their aging processes.
China's rapidly aging
population faces a looming triple bind. Apart from the family, China
lacks any functional nationwide arrangements for pensioning its elders.
Thus, a great many Chinese will have to continue to work into old age.
But working life in China typically entails more physical labor, which
does not favor the frail, than work in Japan or the United States.
China's aging problem has the makings of a slow-motion humanitarian
The term, "sub-replacement fertility" refers to a
population. Sanger and her allies referred to the individual in their
enthusiasm for birth control. The two were and remain unalterably
interconnected. Eberstadt's article speaks of the "rapid spread of
sub-replacement fertility." The lingo is fancy, while the meaning is
plain. A population in decline is a population which opts for birth
control, to add to the various other causes for death of the young -- a
replacement generation, on which so much is predicated. Without
reproduction equal to the needs of replacing a population, that
population's culture will dwindle and its ideals, values and culture
must necessarily wither. The Darwinian understanding suggests that this
evidences that population as plainly unfit. It is to this that Margaret
Sanger has contributed, and therefore her words need be revisited to
experience with the hindsight of a century's experimentation what "kill
it" -- her words verbatim -- has meant to whole nations and cultures.
[ 2 ]
"Millions" is a number readily agreed to and
unchallenged in Planned Parenthood documentation, much like the ubiquitous
"Billions served" message of fast food restaurants. The scholarly Rabbi Eli
Schochet of Shomrei Torah commented that "millions" is a word often reserved
to define the Holocaust of World War II, or the results of decades of
pogroms of Soviet Russia, the genocide in Cambodia under Pol Pot, and the
wholesale slaughter in Rwanda, but rarely stirs a similar critical
conclusion for many in the ongoing political debate about abortion, which
entities should support it financially and what it means.
Irrespective of morality, abortion and birth control seem to be massively
impacting Western populations, as they dwindle in numbers unimagined at the
start of the birth control phenomenon of the 20th century.
The most "fit" societies seem to be those who evidence reproductive
outcomes of approximately 2.1 children per family, while "unfit" societies
evidence reproductive rates below this statistical biological replacement
value. Sanger's eugenic theories seem to have gotten Darwin's theory of
"survival of the fittest" wholly wrong, as demographically tested and
verified over the span of many decades.
Societies which abort their young in greatest numbers do not show signs
of survival, but rather withering. Sanger's eugenics has contributed to
this withering numbered now in the "millions." There is no debate in
population figures, and no long term political value in pretending the
demographic changes are not occurring.
[ 3 ]
p. 117, Birth Control in America, "The
Career of Margaret Sanger," by David Kennedy, quoting a 1923 Sanger speech.
[ 4 ]
p. 2, Birth Control Review, Nov. 1921.
[ 5 ]
In Women and the New Race, Eugenics Publishing Co.,
1920, 1923. One should note Sanger's choice of "mercy" to describe
killing an infant. It is, at best, a macabre choice. But Sanger stated that
the urge to infanticide was greater than the urge to motherhood. For any who
might doubt this, the book is available from Project Gutenburg as a free
Women and the New Race, one will read, "If infanticide did not spring
from a desire within the woman herself, from a desire stronger than
motherhood, would it prevail where women enjoy an influence equal to that of
men? And does not the fact that the women in question do enjoy such
influence, point unmistakably to the motive behind the practice?"
Moreover, Sanger corresponded with Ernst Rudin, architect of the National
Socialists in Hitler's Germany, and Sanger published Rudin's "Eugenic
Sterilization: An Urgent Need" in
Birth Control Review, which Margaret Sanger started and continued to
influence until its demise in 1940. The article appeared three months before
the German 'sterilization law was passed in Germany.
this seem out of place for Sanger, she wrote in
A Plan for Peace (1932) of her plan "to apply a
stern and rigid policy of sterilization transmitted to offspring." Her
plan also called for giving "certain dysgenic groups in our population their
choice of segregation or sterilization," and apportioning "farm lands and
homesteads for these segregated persons where they would be taught to work
under competent instructors for the period of their entire lives."
other words, eugenic concentration camps for those deemed "dysgenic" -- an
adjective defined as "causing deterioration of hereditary qualities of a
[ 6 ]
The Woman Rebel - No Gods, No Masters, May
1914, Vol. 1, No. 3.
[ 7 ]
Woman's Body, Woman's
Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America, by Linda Gordon. In
addition, in 1939, Margaret Sanger organized the “Negro Project,”
designed to eliminate members of what she considered an “inferior race.” She
claimed “the masses of Negroes ... particularly in the South, still breed
carelessly and disastrously, with the result that the increase among
Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that portion of the population
least intelligent and fit...” “Beyond Birth Control: The Population Control
Agenda." L. Gordon,
Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right (New York: Penguin Press, 1990),
p. 332. See also, G. Grant, Killer Angel: A Biography of Planned
Parenthood’s Founder Margaret Sanger (Ars Vitae Press: Franklin, Tenn.,
1995), p. 72-73.
fact, throughout the 1930s, Sanger spoke to convocations of the Ku Klux
Klan. (See pages 366-367 of
Margaret Sanger, An Autobiography (1971 reprint by Dover
Publications, Inc. of the 1938 original published by W.W. Norton & Company)
She argued that there were in fact "genetically inferior races." The overt
racism of Margaret Sanger, found documented in her own words has been
suppressed in favor of the Mathusian argument for abortion as the answer to
Turner, one of the co-chairs of the State of the World Forum, wants to
drastically reduce the world’s population:
simplest answer is that the world’s population should be about two billion,
and we’ve got about six billion now. I haven’t done the actuarial tables,
but if every woman in the world voluntarily stepped up and said, ‘I’ll only
have one child,’ and if we did that for the next 80 to 100 years that would
reduce the kind of suffering we’re having. ... We could have 10 billion
people living below the poverty line, or we could have two billion people
living well, and having color TVs and an automobile. The planet can support
that number of people, and that’s the way it was in 1930. … Personally, I
think the population should be closer to when we had indigenous populations,
back before the advent of farming.”
Source: T. Rembert, “Ted Turner: Billionaire, Media Mogul ... And
should be noted, in order to measure his ideological stance with his
personal behavior, Turner has had three unsuccessful marriages and has
five children. [The emphasis is mine.] It seems obvious that
his view of what other people should do to prevent over-population is not
related to his own personal life. This is essentially an elite racist
argument, in which the wealthy ideologue sees reduction in another ethnic,
cultural or racial "class" as good, while said advice is not applicable to
his class and station.
[ 8 ]
Quoted in Population Implosion Worries a Graying Europe,
by Michael Specter in the
New York Times, July 10, 1998.
Specter further quotes Dr. Pierpaolo Donati, professor of sociology at the
University of Bologna and a leading Catholic intellectual "Prosperity has
strangled us. Comfort is now the only thing anybody believes in. The ethic
of sacrifice for a family -- one of the basic ideas of human societies --
has become a historical notion. It is astonishing." So for Sanger, urban
poverty was linked to "uncontrolled" fertility, while controlled fertility
would "breed" prosperity. The problem is that prosperity is an
intergenerational economic phenomenon, and requires, as Chesnais [cited
above] states, a world with "children in it." Birth control, therefore
must also be linked to infertility of whole national and cultural
populations, whose demographic decline is most assuredly linked to birth
control and abortion, as well as issues of prosperity and taxation.
similar view, British Member of Parliament David Willetts has written,
"Europe faces a birth-dearth. Nobody wants to force women to have more
children than they wish. But we have created an environment in which people
are having fewer children than they aspire to. ("At the Launch of his
Pamphlet 'Old Europe?', 23 Sep 2003.) Willetts added, "What Europe
really needs is more babies. This is not a matter of forcing traditional
roles on women: countries were the feminist revolution has advanced furthest
also have higher birth rates. Nor can people be forced to have more children
than they want."
Rakhsat Sleiman offers a similar conclusion in "Europe's Demographic
Evolution Through to the Year 2050" (Centre d'Etudes Prospectives et
d'Informations Internationales, June 2006). He writes, "...the fall in
the working populations and the number of young people will be sufficiently
large to lead to a reduction in population sizes, that in some cases will be
another similar viewpoint, George Weigel addressed Europe's "two culture
wars," illuminating the trajectory of Europe's demographic crisis and its
"self-defeating, nihilistic, post-modernism." He wrote, "The overall
picture is sobering enough. Not a single European Union member has a
replacement-level fertility rate, i.e., the 2.1 children per woman needed to
maintain a stable population. Moreover, eleven EU countries—including
Germany, Austria, Italy, Hungary, and all three Baltic states—display
'negative natural increase' (i.e., more annual deaths than births), a clear
step down into a demographic death-spiral." [Commentary Magazine, May
"death-spiral" began with the advocacy of state-sponsored birth control and
abortion. As Margaret Sanger so clearly said, "Kill it." It is societal
norms, whole populations and cultures which are being "killed," i.e., proven
"unfit," while Sanger saw the unfit as poor minorities who she happily
called "reckless breeders."
This view is only now beginning to be documented as racist, though it has
been from the start.
considering the future, the European Union commissioned and published a
report which speaks to the critical need for "replacement bodies", which
states, "...demographic growth in the EU has resulted more from immigration
than from natural increase." [p. 19, The New Global Puzzle - What World
for the EU in 2025?, Nicole Gnesotto and Giovanni Grevi, eds., EU
Institute for Security Studies, 2006.]
is proof from contemporary demographers that population replacement, due to
sub-replacement fertility which is fueled in part by prevalent, state and
insurance sponsored abortion, is necessary for the simple survival of a
people and a culture. These demographic realities are beginning to overturn
Malthusian arguments, and expose the lunacy of eugenics as espoused by
Sanger and others of her convictions.
those poor who are the new migrant pool of "replacement bodies," birth
control having exterminated the "thoroughbreds" of Sanger's and Stope's
eugenic fantasy, and not merely the "unwanted" and "defective."
true Darwinian would conclude that those who opt for birth control and
abortion are in fact "self limiting" and therefore proving themselves
"unfit," a conclusion which would surely have astounded this naive yet
central woman in the forefront of feminism and "abortion rights." For
today's fallacious interpreters of Darwin, the single fact of natural
selection is that fitness is the natural way forward, while aborting a
generation is the exact opposite -- though it fulfills the Maltusian image
of population reduction -- the polar opposite of natural selection.
[ 9 ]
p. 488, Chapter XIV, "Conclusion." Charles Darwin, (1859)
On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the
preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: John
Murray. 1st edition, 1st issue.
[ 10 ]
op. cit. p. 490.
[ 11 ]
Robert A. Heinlein, quotation from Heinlein's address at the U.S.
Naval Academy April 5, 1973.
[ 12 ]
Mother Teresa, in The Nobel Peace Prize 1979 Nobel Lecture, 11