Sarah Terzo

The racist underpinnings of the abortion movement

Sarah Terzo
By Sarah Terzo
Image

March 26, 2013 (LiveActionNews.org) - According to an article in The Daily Caller, African-American teenagers have an abortion rate of over double the national average. Black teenagers (in the 15- to 19-year-old age group) have an abortion rate of 41 per 1,000. The national average is 18 per 1,000 among 15- to 19-year-olds. White teenagers have an abortion rate of 10 per 1,000 women, which means that African-American teenagers are having abortions at a rate that is four times that of white teenagers.

The situation is even more grim in New York. Sixty-seven percent of African-American teenagers’ pregnancies end in abortion in that state. New York has some of the most liberal abortion laws in the country, and one of the highest abortion rates. Forty-one percent of all babies conceived by residents of New York are aborted.

According to New York Archbishop Timothy Dolan:

If 41% of New York babies are aborted, with the percentage even higher in the Bronx and among our African-American babies in the world, it is downright chilling.

The National Black Pro-Life Coalition is an organization that wants to reduce the abortion rate in the African-American population. They claim that abortion providers like Planned Parenthood deliberately place their abortion facilities in areas with large minority populations.

African-American pro-life groups also seek to raise awareness of Planned Parenthood’s racist roots. Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, has a dubious racial record that includes speaking at KKK meetings and permitting racist authors to contribute to her publication. Part of her motivation to legalize birth control was to cut down on births among the “unfit,” which included the black population.

In one of her publications, she said, “Birth control must lead ultimately to a cleaner race” (1).

She plotted to market birth control to the black community in order to lower their birth rate:

We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the 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. (2)

The abortion rights movement in the 1960s also sought to use African-American figureheads to push for legalization of abortion. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, who later turned pro-life, was the co-founder of the National Association to Appeal Abortion Laws (now NARAL Pro-Choice America). Nathanson quotes Laurence Lader, his co-founder of NARAL:

We’ve got to keep the women out in front. … And some blacks. Black women especially. Why are they so damn slow to see the importance of this whole movement to themselves? (3)

There is racism among abortion providers also. In 2012, members of the pro-life community were stunned when pro-lifers caught abortionist Ron Virmani on tape saying (see video below):

I as a taxpayer do not wish for these babies to be born, and brought up, and kill those people in Colorado. Go ahead and pay for them, let me see you adopt one of those ugly black babies.

 

 

In just a few sentences, Virmani manages to insult the African-American community and promote two racist stereotypes about African-Americans – that they are on welfare and that they are criminals. These disgusting remarks show that he is performing abortions on African-American women in a deliberate attempt to control the African-American population.

Click "like" if you are PRO-LIFE!

Some years ago, another abortionist made the news for similar statements. Dr. Edward Allred owns a chain of abortion clinics called Family Planning Associates. This collection of clinics brings in millions of dollars in revenue for him. He was quoted in the San Diego Union saying the following:

Population control is too important to be stopped by some right wing pro-life types…. When a sullen black woman of 17 or 18 can decide to have a baby and get welfare and food stamps and become a burden to all of us, it’s time to stop. In parts of South Los Angeles, having babies for welfare is the only industry these people have. (4)

These racist remarks show Allred’s contempt for many of the women he aborts. One wonders whether his attitude affects the care that African-Americans receive at his clinics.

One reason why abortions are so high among African-American teenagers is because social workers and counselors sometimes push abortion as a solution to their pregnancies. According to Janet Hadley, a pro-choice feminist:

Among medical professionals and social workers, teenagers are perhaps most likely to encounter people with more liberal views about abortion, and to find themselves on the defensive if they are determined to continue their pregnancies… pregnant women whose cultures or circumstances do not fit … are disapproved of as candidates for motherhood. Tacit disapproval – urging the woman towards abortion and, if she insists on keeping the pregnancy, castigating her for her “irrational” selfishness[.] … Black teenagers, in particular, are singled out by the medical and social work profession as “problem parents[.]” … [O]utright coercion or bullying is hard to prove, but, undoubtedly, young mothers, poor mothers, and above all poor young black mothers are being hustled towards abortion with no respect for their “right to choose.” (5)

While it is impossible to know how widespread the practice of pushing African-American teens to have abortions is, the fact that a pro-choice author sees a problem is a revealing.

Feminists for Life recorded a spokesperson of NARAL making statements that indicate that this phenomenon may be more common than one might think. The American Feminist (a publication of FFL) quoted Nancy White, who was speaking on behalf of NARAL Pro-Choice America, saying:

The 54% of Black children born to unwed mothers are not productive members of society. Teenagers never make good mothers[.] (6)

When social workers and counselors try to steer pregnant African-American teenagers towards abortion because of their own prejudices, it is a violation of the teenagers’ rights. This may be one reason why the African-American teen abortion rate is so high. Pro-lifers need to offer support and positive counseling to young women in the African-American community, and resources to help them have their babies. Many pro-lifers are doing this already. If pro-lifers can counter the racism inherent in the abortion business, more African-American babies will be saved.

  1. Margaret Sanger. Woman, Morality, and Birth Control . (New York: New York Publishing Company, 1922) 12. (http://blackquillandink.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/margaret-sanger-quotes.pdf)
  2. Margaret Sanger’s December 19, 1939 letter to Dr. Clarence Gamble, 255 Adams Street, Milton, Massachusetts. Original source: Sophia Smith Collection, Smith College, North Hampton, Massachusetts. Also described in Linda Gordon’s Woman’s Body, Woman’s Right: A Social History of Birth Control in America . New York: Grossman Publishers, 1976. (http://blackquillandink.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/margaret-sanger-quotes.pdf)
  3. Bernard N Nathanson, M.D. with Richard N Ostling. Aborting America (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Company, 1979) 53
  4. “Doctor’s Abortion Business Is Lucrative,” San Diego Union, 12 October 1980, at B-1, col. 1
  5. Janet Hadley “Abortion: Between Freedom and Necessity” (Great Britain: Virago Press, 1996) p 104, 106
  6. The American Feminist Summer 1994 p 14

Reprinted with permission from LiveActionNews.org

Only 5 days left!

Support pro-life news. Help us reach our critical spring fundraising goal by April 1!


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Indiana Gov. Mike Pence signs the state's Religious Freedom Restoration Act.
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Indiana faces backlash as it becomes 20th state to protect religious liberty

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

INDIANAPOLIS, IN, March 27, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – On Thursday, Indiana became the 20th state to prevent the government from forcing people of faith to violate their religious beliefs in business or the public square.

Gov. Mike Pence signed the Religious Freedom Restoration Act (SB 101) into law, saying the freedom of religion is a preeminent American value.

“The Constitution of the United States and the Indiana Constitution both provide strong recognition of the freedom of religion, but today, many people of faith feel their religious liberty is under attack by government action,” Pence said.

Gov. Pence, a possible dark horse candidate for president in 2016, cited court cases brought by religious organizations and employers, including Catholic universities, against the HHS mandate. “One need look no further than the recent litigation concerning the Affordable Care Act. A private business and our own University of Notre Dame had to file lawsuits challenging provisions that required them to offer insurance coverage in violation of their religious views.”

The new law could also prevent Christian business owners from being compelled to bake a cake or take photographs of a same-sex "marriage" ceremony, if doing so violates their faith. In recent years, business owners have seen an increased level of prosecution for denying such services, despite their religious and moral beliefs.

The state's pro-life organization applauded Pence for his stance. "Indiana's pro-life community is grateful to Gov. Mike Pence for signing the Religious Freedom Restoration Act into law,” said Indiana Right to Life's president and CEO Mike Fichter. “This bill will give pro-lifers a necessary legal recourse if they are pressured to support abortion against their deeply-held religious beliefs.”

“RFRA is an important bill to protect the religious freedom of Hoosiers who believe the right to life comes from God, not government,” he said.

The state RFRA is based on the federal bill introduced by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, and signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1993. The Supreme Court cited the federal law when it ruled that Hobby Lobby had the right to refuse to fund abortion-inducing drugs, if doing so violated its owners' sincerely held religious beliefs.

In signing the measure – similar to the one Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer vetoed – Pence and the state of Indiana have faced a torrent of venom from opponents of the bill, who claim it grants a “right to discriminate” and raises the spectre of segregation.

"They've basically said, as long as your religion tells you to, it's OK to discriminate against people," said Sarah Warbelow, legal director of the Human Rights Campaign, a national homosexual pressure group.

The Disciples of Christ, a liberal Protestant denomination based in the state capital, has said it will move its 2017 annual convention if the RFRA became state law. The NCAA warned the bill's adoption “might affect future events” in the Hoosier state.

Pence denied such concerns, saying, "This bill is not about discrimination, and if I thought it legalized discrimination in any way I would've vetoed it."

The bill's supporters say that, under the Obama administration, it is Christians who are most likely to suffer discrimination.

"Originally RFRA laws were intended to protect small religious groups from undue burdens on practicing their faith in public life,” said Mark Tooley, president of the Institute on Religion and Democracy. “It was not imagined there would come a day when laws might seek to jail or financially destroy nuns, rabbis or Christian camp counselors who prefer to abstain from the next wave of sexual and gender experimentation. And there's always a next wave.”

The bill's supporters note that it does not end the government's right to coerce people of faith into violating their conscience in every situation. However, it requires that doing so has to serve a compelling government interest and the government must use the least restrictive means possible. “There will be times when a state or federal government can show it has a compelling reason for burdening religious expression – to ensure public safety, for instance,” said Sarah Torre, an expert at the Heritage Foundation. “But Religious Freedom Restoration Acts set a high bar for the government to meet in order to restrict religious freedom.”

Restricting the ability of government to interfere in people's private decisions, especially their religious decisions, is the very purpose of the Constitution, its supporters say.

"Religious freedom is the cornerstone of all liberty for all people,” Tooley said. “Deny or reduce it, and there are no ultimate limits on the state's power to coerce."

Advertisement
Featured Image
Fight pornography. Beat pornography. And join the ranks of those who support their fellow men and women still fighting.
Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon

Porn is transforming our men from protectors into predators. Fight back.

Jonathon van Maren Jonathon van Maren Follow Jonathon
By Jonathon van Maren

Since I’ve gotten involved in anti-pornography work, I’ve met countless men who struggle, fight, or have beaten pornography. Each person seems to deal with the guilt and shame that accompanies porn use in a different way—some deny that it’s “all that bad,” others pretend that they could “stop whenever they want,” many insist that “everyone is doing it,” and most, when pressed, admit to a deep sense of self-loathing.

One worry surfaces often in conversation: What do my past or current struggles with pornography say about me as a man? Can I ever move past this and have a meaningful and fulfilling relationship?

I want to address this question just briefly, since I’ve encountered it so many times.

First, however, I’ve written before how I at times dislike the language of “struggling” with pornography or pornography “addiction,” not because they aren’t accurate but because too often they are used as an excuse rather than an explanation. It is true, many do in fact “struggle” with what can legitimately be considered an addiction, but when this language is used to describe an interminable battle with no end (and I’ve met dozens of men for whom this is the case), then I prefer we use terminology like “fighting my porn habit.” A semantic debate, certainly, but one I think is important. We need to stop struggling with porn and start fighting it.

Secondly, pornography does do devastating things to one’s sense of masculinity. We know this. Pornography enslaves men by the millions, perverting their role as protector and defender of the more vulnerable and turning them into sexual cannibals, consuming those they see on-screen to satisfy their sexual appetites.

What often starts as mere curiosity or an accidental encounter can turn into something that invades the mind and twists even the most basic attractions. I’ve met porn users who can’t believe the types of things they want to watch. They haven’t simply been using porn. Porn has actively reshaped them into something they don’t recognize and don’t like. 

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Porn is this generation’s great assault on masculinity and the role of men in society. It is essential that we win this battle for the sake of society’s survival. Contrary to what the gender-bending and family-morphing progressive elites claim, good husbands and good fathers and good church leaders are necessary for a healthy society. But pornography is destroying marriages, creating distant and disconnected fathers, and, metaphoricaclly castrating men, hindering their ability and desire to make a positive difference in the society around us.

So, with this sobering set of facts in mind let’s return to the question: what do pornography struggles, past and present, say about a man?

The proper way to respond is with everything that is good about masculinity. We have to fight pornography as men have fought countless evils throughout the ages. We need to fight pornography to protect women, and wives, and children, and our society at large. This is how pornography threatens society, by castrating men, and turning them from protectors into predators. Rooting out the evil in our own lives allows us to better fulfill the role we are called to perform in the lives of others. Battling our own demons enables us to battle the wider cultural demons. Every day without porn is another bit of virtue built. Virtue is not something you’re born with. Virtues are habits that you build. And one day without porn is the first step towards the virtue of being porn-free.

Many men ask me if men who have had past porn addictions are cut out for being in a relationship or working in the pro-life movement or in other areas where we are called to protect and defend the weak and vulnerable. And the answer to that is an unequivocal yes. Our society needs men who know what it means to fight battles and win. Our society needs men who can say that they fought porn and they beat porn, because their families and their friends were too important to risk. Our society needs men who rose to the challenge that the evils of their generation threw at them, and became better men as the result. And our society needs men who can help their friends and their sons and those around them fight the plague of pornography and free themselves from it, too—and who can understand better and offer encouragement more relevant than someone who has fought and been freed themselves?

So the answer to men is yes. Fight pornography. Beat pornography. And join the ranks of those who support their fellow men and women still fighting. Lend them support and encouragement. We cannot change the fact that porn has left an enormous path of destruction in its wake. But we can change the fact that too many people aren’t fighting it. We can change our own involvement. And we can rise to the challenge and face this threat to masculinity with all that is good about masculinity.

Follow Jonathon van Maren on Facebook

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry

Red Alert!

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

I don’t like having to do this, but we have always found it best to be totally upfront with our readers: our Spring fundraising campaign is now worrying us! 

You see, with just 6 days remaining, we have only raised 30% of our goal, with $125,000 still left to raise. That is a long ways to go yet.

We have no choice but to reach our minimum goal of $175,000 if we are going to be able to continue serving the 5+ million readers who rely on us every month for investigative and groundbreaking news reports on life, faith and family issues.

Every year, LifeSite readership continues to grow by leaps and bounds. This year, we are again experiencing record-breaking interest, with over 6 million people visiting our website last month alone!

This unprecedented growth in turn creates its own demand for increased staff and resources, as we struggle to serve these millions of new readers.

And especially keep this in mind. As many more people read LifeSite, our mission of bringing about cultural change gets boosted. Our ultimate goal has always been to educate and activate the public to take well-informed, needed actions.

Another upside to our huge growth in readers is that it should be that much easier to reach our goal. To put it simply: if each person who read this one email donated whatever they could (even just $10) we would easily surpass our goal! 

Today, I hope you will join the many heroes who keep this ship afloat, and enable us to proclaim the truth through our reporting to tens of millions of people every year!

Your donations to LifeSite cause major things to happen! We see that every day and it is very exciting. Please join with us in making a cultural impact with a donation of ANY AMOUNT right now. 

You can also donate by phone or mail. We would love to hear from you!

Thank you so much for your support. 

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook