Moultrie Mobile
Sanger-Hitler connection
Community
Contributors to this thread:
Mad dog 01-Sep-17
ben h 02-Sep-17
Atheist 02-Sep-17
ben h 02-Sep-17
Atheist 02-Sep-17
Woods Walker 03-Sep-17
Tonybear61 03-Sep-17
From: Mad dog
01-Sep-17
Great find, Spike. Have to get his new book. The evil witch is getting exposed more and more, especially in the A.A community. Mad Dog

From: ben h
02-Sep-17
Interesting read. In the early 1900's eugenics was a belief held by many. Selective breeding has been practiced with animals for centuries, it gets into a moral issue when you're referring to people though, but from a purely "technical" standpoint it probably would work, it's just a question of if we should do it. We already "fix" mentally retarded people in many cases so those traits don't get proliferated which is eugenics. I'm not sure if P.P. provides vasectomies, but there are a lot of guys out there that from a societal standpoint we'd be way better off if they weren't breeding. I don't think we should force this in any way though.

I don't know if Sanger was in fact a racist or if she just promoted birth control primarily to minorities because they were the most affected with poverty and un-wanted pregnancies. Either way I support preventing un-wanted pregnancies although I am personally opposed to abortions. I can see how this looks bad though looking back in the rear view mirror a hundred years later.

From: Atheist
02-Sep-17
It's called pro choice. Not pro abortion. The choice is between a medical professional and the woman. Your opinion, religious or not is irrelevant. The fact is, it's the current law and it is as it should be. Now keep your religion to yourself and let the rest of us live according to science and reality.

From: ben h
02-Sep-17
Atheist, I'm not sure if your post was directed at me, but I didn't imply PP was pro-abortion. I think they primarily intend to prevent un-wanted pregnancy, and they do use abortion in their tool chest to terminate un-wanted pregnancies to accomplish this as well. I am PERSONALLY opposed to this, but I'm not opposed to someone else choosing this option if that's what's in their best interest. Indirectly this is a form of eugenics, but it's certainly not forced on anybody like the Nazis intended to do. So I think it's quite a stretch to imply she supported Nazis just because they shared a belief in selective breeding. I do a fair bit of upland and waterfowl hunting and I am a firm believer in selective breeding for hunting dogs, I don't see why the same concepts wouldn't apply to people, I just don't think we should force the issue. We sort of already do this with socioeconomic status and aesthetics, naturally anyway.

From: Atheist
02-Sep-17
That was not meant for you Ben, we are in agreement.

From: Woods Walker
03-Sep-17

Woods Walker's embedded Photo
Woods Walker's embedded Photo
Hey spike, it's just more lies from the left. It's all they've got. Hell, it's all they've ever had. It's who they elect.....liars. The only way they can get anything passed is by lying about it because if they told the truth for once they'd never get anything passed, like Obamacare.

From: Tonybear61
03-Sep-17

Tonybear61's Link
Interesting read. In the early 1900's eugenics was a belief held by many. Yeah heard about this when I took a politics of biology and science course in college.

Seems a certain Charles Dight at U of M was in communications with Chancellor Hitler in the 1920s to try and bring it here to the US. His center for human genetics as he called it was still as recently as the 1960s... There was a hall still bearing his name at the University when I worked there about 15 years ago. How about tearing that monument down???

  • Sitka Gear