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

FREE pro-life news.

Stay up-to-date on the issues you care about the most. Subscribe today. 

Select Your Edition:


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Lisa Bourne

,

Pressure mounts as Catholic Relief Services fails to act on VP in gay ‘marriage’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne
Image
Rick Estridge, Catholic Relief Services' Vice President of Overseas Finance, is in a same-sex "marriage," public records show. Twitter

BALTIMORE, MD, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- Nearly a week after news broke that a Catholic Relief Services vice president had contracted a homosexual “marriage” while also publicly promoting homosexuality on social media in conflict with Church teaching, the US Bishops international relief agency has taken no apparent steps to address the matter and is also not talking.

CRS Vice President of Overseas Finance Rick Estridge entered into a homosexual “marriage” in Maryland the same month in 2013 that he was promoted by CRS to vice president, public records show.

Despite repeated efforts at a response, CRS has not acknowledged LifeSiteNews’ inquiries during the week. And the agency told ChurchMilitant.com Thursday that no action had been taken beyond discussion of the situation and CRS would have no further comment.

"Nothing has changed,” CRS Senior Manager for Communications Tom said. “No further statement will be made."

LifeSiteNews first contacted CRS for a response prior to the April 20 release of the report and did not receive a reply, however Estridge’s Facebook and LinkeIn profiles were then removed just prior to the report’s release.

CRS also did not acknowledge LifeSiteNews’ follow-up inquiry later in the week.

“Having an executive who publicly celebrates a moral abomination shows the ineffectiveness of CRS' Catholic identity training,” Lepanto Institute President Michael Hichborn told LifeSiteNews. “How many others who hate Catholic moral teaching work at CRS?”

CRS did admit it was aware Estridge was in a “same-sex civil marriage” to Catholic News Agency (CNA) Monday afternoon, and confirmed he was VP of Overseas Finance and had been with CRS for 16 years.

“At this point we are in deliberations on this matter,” Price told CNA that day.

ChurchMilitant.com also reported that according to its sources, it was a well-known fact at CRS headquarters in Baltimore that Estridge was in a homosexual “marriage.” 

“There is no way CRS didn't know one of its executives entered into a mock-marriage until we broke the story,” Hichborn said. “The implication is clear; CRS top brass had no problem with having an executive so deliberately flouting Catholic moral teaching.”

“The big question is,” Hichborn continued, “what other morally repugnant matters is CRS comfortable with?”

While the wait continues for the Bishops’ relief organization to address the matter, those behind the report and other critics of prior instances of CRS involvement in programs and groups that violate Church principles continue to call for a thorough and independent review of the agency programs and personnel.

“How long should it take to call an employee into your office, tell him that his behavior is incompatible with the mission of the organization, and ask for his resignation?” asked Population Research Institute President Steven Mosher. “About thirty minutes, I would say.”

“The Catholic identity of CRS is at stake,” Hichborn stated. “If CRS does nothing, then there is no way faithful Catholics can trust the integrity of CRS's programs or desire to make its Catholicity preeminent.” 

Advertisement
Featured Image
Thousands of marriage activists gathered in D.C. June 19, 2014 for the 2nd March for Marriage. Dustin Siggins / LifeSiteNews.com
The Editors

, ,

Watch the March for Marriage online—only at LifeSiteNews

The Editors
By

WASHINGTON, D.C., April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) -- At noon on Saturday, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and dozens of cosponsors, coalition partners, and speakers will launch the third annual March for Marriage. Thousands of people are expected to take place in this important event to show the support real marriage has among the American people.

As the sole media sponsor of the March, LifeSiteNews is proud to exclusively livestream the March. Click here to see the rally at noon Eastern Time near the U.S. Capitol, and the March to the Supreme Court at 1:00 Eastern Time.

And don't forget to pray that God's Will is done on Tuesday, when the Supreme Court hears arguments about marriage!

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben

, ,

Hillary Clinton: ‘Religious beliefs’ against abortion ‘have to be changed’

Ben Johnson Ben Johnson Follow Ben
By Ben Johnson

NEW YORK CITY, April 24, 2015 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Speaking to an influential gathering in New York City on Thursday, Hillary Clinton declared that “religious beliefs” that condemn "reproductive rights," “have to be changed.”

“Yes, we've cut the maternal mortality rate in half, but far too many women are still denied critical access to reproductive health,” Hillary told the Women in the World Summit yesterday.

Liberal politicians use “reproductive health” as a blanket term that includes abortion. However, Hillary's reference echoes National Organization for Women (NOW) president Terry O’Neill's op-ed from last May that called abortion “an essential measure to prevent the heartbreak of infant mortality.”

The Democratic presidential hopeful added that governments should throw the power of state coercion behind the effort to redefine traditional religious dogmas.

“Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper. Laws have to be backed up with resources, and political will,” she said. “Deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs, and structural biases have to be changed.”

The line received rousing applause at the feminist conference, hosted in Manhattan's Lincoln Center by Tina Brown.

She also cited religious-based objections to the HHS mandate, funding Planned Parenthood, and the homosexual and transgender agenda as obstacles that the government must defeat.

“America moves ahead when all women are guaranteed the right to make their own health care choices, not when those choices are taken away by an employer like Hobby Lobby,” she said. The Supreme Court ruled last year that closely held corporations had the right to opt out of the provision of ObamaCare requiring them to provide abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives, and sterilization to employees with no co-pay – a mandate that violates the teachings of the Catholic Church and other Christian bodies.

Clinton lamented that “there are those who offer themselves as leaders...who would defund the country's leading provider of family planning,” Planned Parenthood, “and want to let health insurance companies once again charge women just because of our gender.”

“We move forward when gay and transgender women are embraced...not fired from good jobs because of who they love or who they are,” she added.

It is not the first time the former first lady had said that liberal social policies should displace religious views. In a December 2011 speech in Geneva, then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said perhaps the “most challenging issue arises when people cite religious or cultural values as a reason to violate or not to protect the human rights of LGBT citizens.” These objections, she said, are “not unlike the justification offered for violent practices towards women like honor killings, widow burning, or female genital mutilation.”

While opinions on homosexuality are “still evolving,” in time “we came to learn that no [religious] practice or tradition trumps the human rights that belong to all of us.”

Her views, if outside the American political mainstream, have been supported by the United Nations. The UN Population Fund stated in its 2012 annual report that religious objections to abortion-inducing drugs had to be overcome. According to the UNFPA report, “‘duty-bearers’ (governments and others)” have a responsibility to assure that all forms of contraception – including sterilization and abortion-inducing ‘emergency contraception’ – are viewed as acceptable – “But if they are not acceptable for cultural, religious or other reasons, they will not be used.”

Two years later, the United Nations' Committee on the Rights of the Child instructed the Vatican last February that the Catholic Church should amend canon law “relating to abortion with a view to identifying circumstances under which access to abortion services may be permitted.”

At Thursday's speech, Hillary called the legal, state-enforced implementation of feminist politics “the great unfinished business of the 21st century,” which must be accomplished “not just for women but for everyone — and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.”

“These are not just women's fights. These have to be America's fights and the world's fights,” she said. “There's still much to be done in our own country, much more to be done around the world, but I'm confident and optimistic that if we get to work, we will get it done together.”

American critics called Clinton's suggestion that a nation founded upon freedom of religion begin using state force to change religious practices unprecedented.

“Never before have we seen a presidential candidate be this bold about directly confronting the Catholic Church's teachings on abortion,” said Bill Donohue of the Catholic League.

“In one sense, this shows just how extreme the pro-abortion caucus actually is,” Ed Morrissey writes at HotAir.com. “Running for president on the basis of promising to use the power of government to change 'deep seated cultural codes [and] religious beliefs' might be the most honest progressive slogan in history.”

He hoped that, now that she had called for governments to change religious doctrines, “voters will now see the real Hillary Clinton, the one who dismisses their faith just the same as Obama did, and this time publicly rather than in a private fundraiser.”

Donohue asked Hillary “to take the next step and tell us exactly what she plans to do about delivering on her pledge. Not only would practicing Catholics like to know, so would Evangelicals, Orthodox Jews, Muslims, and all those who value life from conception to natural death.”

You may watch Hillary's speech below.

Her comments on religion begin at approximately 9:00. 

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook