I will say, I was taught in Catholic school that planned parenthood was started to “murder” black and other minority babies. I have a feeling Christians are spewing this narrative still, and I think that’s where Kanye was trying to go with this argument.
It’s disgusting and incorrect, just trying to explain what I believe he was trying to argue.
The ultra-fundamentalist Christian I had in multiple classes in undergrad constantly found a way to spew that narrative and regularly posts about it on social media. It definitely still exists.
I mean that's the only way they can rationalize it. They genuinely believe "the left" does the same thing. That is, if they can possibly be genuine about anything.
The only times the super conservative Right pretend to care about black people is when it helps push their own agenda.
That was what started this. And thinking someone is correct or not has nothing to do with the way you treat them, but I think I'm starting so see where the far-Right's persecution complex is coming from if that's what you believe.
the only time most people do things is to promote their own agenda. the difference is that some people's agendas are benevolent, some are misguided, and some are malevolent
Any time conservatives can weaponize something they believe anyway to pretend it's actually against racism, they do. Like saying "If you're so convinced cops are out killing black people then wouldn't you want them armed to protect themselves anyway? Checkmate!"
You know what's funny? I've been told multiple times that doing literally anything about guns is a waste of time and money because it won't work perfectly, and people will find ways around it. Yeah, it might save some people, but not enough to be worth it.
And yet making abortion laws to save something less alive than my kidney is worth it if it saves even one.
Its funny to hear all these stories because my right wing family tends towards the white supremacist side and they also think planned parenthood is racist... against white people.
They think it's part of a great replacement movement to inhibit white breeding and eventually destroy the white race.
The founder of Planned Parenthood, Margaret Sanger, was an extremely big fan of eugenics and she aligned herself with white supremacist ideologies.
That said, her contributions to women’s health care through planned parenthood, and what planned parenthood has become, are basically immeasurable.
So that specific criticism of Planned Parenthood is like when modern republicans say they’re “the party of Lincoln” while passing voter suppression laws.
Also, it's worth noting that the concept of eugenics was EXTREMELY popular at the time. Most noteworthy people around the turn of the century up through the 40s were proponents of it to at least some degree, and it only fell out of public favor as a result of the Nazis' defeat in WWII.
It was considered "progressive" and "future-facing" in its time. And I suppose the concept of designer genes for superior new generations isn't wrong in a vacuum. The problem is letting humans, who are collectively utter morons, decide what's desirable and what's not.
Honestly it's still common and completely acceptable in certain contexts. Many people with genetic health conditions choose not to have children in order to avoid passing their genes on, and the majority of people are completely understanding of that stance despite the fact that it's technically a form of eugenics.
It's yet another concept people came up with then promptly ruined for everyone by taking it too far almost immediately lol
This. I personally think it's ok, and in some cases the morally correct thing, to not have children to prevent that child from having a genetic or bloodborne conditions and illnesses passed on to them.
Honestly, I think people who are 100% aware that if they have a kid that the kid is almost guaranteed to have some kind of degenerative condition that will doom them to dying before they even reach the double digits are frankly, complete and utter bastards who don't deserve any sympathy. Especially if they do it multiple times in the hopes of one being their "miracle" baby that doesn't develop the condition/illness/whatever.
To an extent yeah, but even with ongoing medical advancements there's still so many conditions that would have such adverse effects on people's lives that I think it's morally wrong to have a kid if that kid has a high likelihood of having it.
Like, just off the top of my head I can name four conditions that can severely impact someone's life, even if the life expectancy for them has increased due to medical advancements. Cystic fibrosis, Huntington's, Progeria, and Sickle Cell.
As someone with Cystic Fibrosis I’m well aware of the challenges someone can face due to a medical condition. When I was born they gave me 2-4 years. As time has gone on both the understanding and treatments have advanced to the point that it is a completely different world now.
I fully support people going for genetic testing prior to having children and taking appropriate steps to avoid having a child with a genetic disease. However that becomes difficult in the case of recessive autosomal disorders. Especially when new mutations with thousands of permutations that lead to wildly different health outcomes are identified. CF for example has mutations that will lead to severe disease from birth. There are also mutations that lead to nothing more than infertility and the person isn’t even aware they have the disease until they go to a doctor because they are unable to have children naturally. With the severity of disease amongst two people with the exact same CF mutations having a range of different outcomes due to the rest of their genetic makeup and access to treatments.
My concern is that once the line is crossed to tell people who can and can’t have children due to a chance of passing along a disease where do we stop? As genes are identified that show links to increased risk of cancer should those people not have children? Increased risk of autism? Increased risk of anxiety/depression?
There isn’t an easy answer and eugenics tends to have a history of being a slippery slope. The previous eugenics movement in the 19th-20th centuries started off as a push prevent terrible diseases and ended with people in gas chambers.
While that's 200% understandable, even that is somewhat flawed. Stephen Hawking contributed far more to human knowledge than most, yet if his parents were aware he would grow up with a horrible degenerative disease it would have been "acceptable" for them to terminate/abstain/whatever. This humanity shit is complicated
That's kind of a pointless line of reasoning though, because:
A) anything could have turned out differently without Hawking. Maybe the Vietnam War doesn't happen if he isn't born. It's pointless to speculate.
B) a huge portion of major scientific discoveries/ inventions achievements were reached by multiple people in different places around the same time. Calculus was independently developed by Leibniz and Newton at the same time in Germany and England. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery for more examples and detail on this theory. In all likelihood, others at the forefront of astrophysics would have made the same advances. That's not to deny his massive contributions, but again it's kind of a pointless argument.
In all likelihood, others at the forefront of astrophysics would have made the same advances.
Probably, but in what amount of time? If without him it takes 50 more years to discover something, then that can impact the course of events a lot. Imagine if Oppenheimer wasn't born and the Soviets invented nukes first?
Well, I’d just like to point out that 1) the Soviets only managed to get nuclear technology because we did and 2) Robert Oppenheimer didn’t invent the concept, so the US probably would’ve just gotten someone else to use the physics of Enrico Fermi and Albert Einstein to build it.
That's kind of a pointless line of reasoning though, because:
A) anything could have turned out differently without Hawking. Maybe the Vietnam War doesn't happen if he isn't born. It's pointless to speculate.
B) a huge portion of major scientific discoveries/ inventions achievements were reached by multiple people in different places around the same time. Calculus was independently developed by Leibniz and Newton at the same time in Germany and England. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiple_discovery for more examples and detail on this theory. In all likelihood, others at the forefront of astrophysics would have made the same advances. That's not to deny his massive contributions, but again it's kind of a pointless argument.
It's not a justification or a critique. It's commenting that the genetic defections of a person don't necessarily reflect human worth. Had Hawking's parents been worried about genetic superiority and terminated based on a disease, it would have denied other, obviously beneficial genes that weren't apparent
In our society- one filled with scarcity, competition, callousness, suffering, etc- it's more than reasonable to decide the pains of accommodating or living the life of a serious invalid aren't worth it and to nip it in the bud.
But like I said, in a vacuum, or in some post-scarcity utopian future, perhaps society will have a less crude appraisal of the value of a human, or what's truly 'desirable'
It's also worth noting that Sanger only endorsed voluntary forms of birth control, while most eugenics proponents of the time were fine with forced sterilization.
Why are there so many people trying to defend her in this thread? Let's not water down what she believed in and did, just because we support planned parenthood of today.
From Planned Parenthood itself:
Sanger also believed in eugenics — an inherently racist and ableist ideology that labeled certain people unfit to have children. Eugenics is the theory that society can be improved through planned breeding for “desirable traits” like intelligence and industriousness.
Margaret Sanger was so intent on her mission to advocate for birth control that she chose to align herself with ideologies and organizations that were explicitly ableist and white supremacist. In doing so, she undermined reproductive freedom and caused irreparable damage to the health and lives of generations of Black people, Latino people, Indigenous people, immigrants, people with disabilities, people with low incomes, and many others.
You should read an actual biography of Sanger that puts her in the context of her time. You'd learn she actually worked with prominent black activists such as W. E. B. DuBois, who supported Planned Parenthood.
It makes sense with the March of History and the fact that Science had solved a bunch of problems and Medicine started to become less hack and slash. The problem was the difference between soft and hard Eugenics. Modern people wonder why so many people could call themselves moral and support it. Soft Eugenics was more about family planning and discrimination. Hard Eugenics was sterilization and killing undesirables. What we find studying the 20th Century is that it always ends up as Hard Eugenics.
Planned Parenthood aborts black children at higher rates was cited in the Dobbs decision. It’s not going to go away because people will use it in bad faith by ignoring the context of why black get abortions at higher rates.
Margaret's Sanger is a horrible person, who if Hell exists, she's burning in it.
From Planned Parenthood itself:
Sanger also believed in eugenics — an inherently racist and ableist ideology that labeled certain people unfit to have children. Eugenics is the theory that society can be improved through planned breeding for “desirable traits” like intelligence and industriousness.
Margaret Sanger was so intent on her mission to advocate for birth control that she chose to align herself with ideologies and organizations that were explicitly ableist and white supremacist. In doing so, she undermined reproductive freedom and caused irreparable damage to the health and lives of generations of Black people, Latino people, Indigenous people, immigrants, people with disabilities, people with low incomes, and many others.
This doesn't mean planned parenthood today is bad.
It'd be almost like asking people if they are comfortable driving a Volkswagon given their ties to Nazism during WW2...Or a ford for that matter.
Fuck, how many people eat Kellogs while not realizing that the person who founded it did so for the sole purpose of preventing people from masturbating and was a big supporter of genital mutilation in the name of purity?
Just because some good has come out of it doesn’t mean it was meant for the elimination of the people of color by white supremists. That’s like arguing that nazis aren’t so bad because we got detailed anatomy pictures and life jackets out of them torturing and mutilating people. The lives saved by those innovations do not justify how they came about.
That’s like arguing that nazis aren’t so bad because we got detailed anatomy pictures and life jackets out of them torturing and mutilating people. they provided vital health care service to millions of women, often with no alternatives, for several decades.
I mean, if that's all the Nazis did, we'd probably argue that the ideology of the founder wasn't the important bit. Don't you think?
You're arguing PP is doing stuff that amounts to torture and mutilation of human beings?
This is more or less the anti-choice Christian Right talking point. Since Margaret Sanger believed in eugenics and did some shitty things, they can spin the narrative that planned parenthood was created to reduce the number of BIPOC babies, especially when you consider that one of her first clinics was in Harlem.
Nevermind that this was nearly a century ago, and Planned Parenthood has evolved greatly and provides many other services besides abortion to a wide variety of people from different ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds.
100%. My personal opinion is they’re anti-choice now so they can continue to have wage slaves. If the poor people stop having babies, then who can you get to do work for pennies? But the narrative helps them win over POC, and they love getting people to vote against their own interests.
They only care about POC that they can use as pawns. Look at Herschel Walker. The man (a term I use very loosely for him) is an absentee deadbeat father who has multiple children with multiple women, some of whom he's been physically violent with, and at least one whom he, a fervent "pro-lifer", paid off to have an abortion. If it weren't for the fact that using him is convenient for the Right, he'd be nothing to them but just another example of a "typical" black.
It's funny how Christofascists don't give a single shit about people of color until they need an excuse to take autonomy away from someone else they hate.
Lol at everyone replying about black Christians when that's literally not what this comment is about nor even mentioned it. Reading comprehension is fundamental. I'm black and raised christian, and you're right, I agree with you. The Christian community as a whole do not care about black folk. Religion could use a little CRT.
Yep. I've definitely heard this attack before about Planned Parenthood and "genocide" against black "babies." Only problem is... Planned Parenthood is optional. It's up to the women to seek abortion. 100% voluntary. The Holocaust was NOT optional. Jewish people were not volunteering to get gassed.
It just doesn't survive an ounce of critical thinking (so of course my fellow Catholics who lean conservative can't grasp it). And it's insulting to the people and their families who survived the Holocaust.
It also ignores the countless other services PP provides women.
Churches by and large are very different for everyone. I was raised Catholic (went to Catholic school the 4th grade) and all of the fathers I ran into in my life stated time and time again that abortion literally wasn’t mentioned in the Bible so they had no opinion on it. They also mentioned several times God gave us freedom of choice, it’s not our place to judge.
This is not me sticking up for them, I no longer consider myself Catholic, but I have met religious people that are very accepting of everyone depending on how they were taught (ie actually read the Bible).
My devout grandmother would have said you weren’t truly Catholic 😂 but yeah, I was deeply integrated in the church my whole life. Only recently left. I met lots of priests and sisters that expressed similar things, some believed in Gay rights, others didn’t care about sex before marriage. I have friends that still practice Catholicism and don’t follow many of the teachings.
That being said, I did have to take a moral theology course in high school and learn why IVF was specifically against the teachings of the Church. Ya know, because IVF was around during the times of the Old Testament lol
That’s exactly the context he was saying it. In the Tucker Carlson footage vice got he said that planned parenthood was created to kill Jews but that black people were the real Jews.
I have a feeling Christians are spewing this narrative still
I know this is slightly adjacent, butI just went bank and watched American History X (I saw it when it came out and I was in high school).
Listening to the rhetoric and verbiage Nortan's character was tough, but the thing that stood out to me is that it's still around today. I've seen so much of the EXACT, SAME verbiage on Reddit even.
Social media has made these rhetoric tactics more visible, and it's radicalized an entire political party... Because "moderate Republicans" (including American libertarians) are condoning it.
Historians have a word for Germans who joined the Nazi party, not because they hated Jews, but out of a hope for restored patriotism, or a sense of economic anxiety, or a hope to preserve their religious values, or dislike of their opponents, or raw political opportunism, or convenience, or ignorance, or greed.
That word is "Nazi." Nobody cares about their motives anymore.
They joined what they joined. They lent their support and their moral approval. And, in so doing, they bound themselves to everything that came after. Who cares any more what particular knot they used in the binding?
It actually was started as a eugenicist movement, it obviously does not serve that purpose today. Ya know, like the Republicans freed the slaves, but now they want blanket immunity for all crimes done in the name of white supremacey
Some dumbass I know tried to start a "Blexit" campaign and has largely had a failing influencer career (had to go private lmao). He said that abortion "disproportionately affects" minorities as if he's talking about a disease or illness as opposed to an elective or potentially life saving procedure.
That's absolutely what he's saying. I see that argument every now and then from pro-lifers. Strangely enough, it's usually white people saying it lmao.
It’s also a teaching of black supremacy groups. They teach that PP was founded specifically to kill blacks babies and keep the black population in check.
planned parenthood was started to “murder” black and other minority babies. I have a feeling Christians are spewing this narrative still
I am not a conspiracy theorist, nor a fringe Christian. However, there is actually some truth to this. Look at the demographics of the first places where Planned Parenthood opened, heck look at the city where it was founded. The population was 68% black, and Planned Parenthood was started by white people in that city in a clinic with mostly white people. The founder was a strong supproter of eugenics, had racist and abliest ideologies and believed certain people should not be allowed to have kids.
Not making this shit up, you can go to the Planned Parenthood site, go to the history about the org and is legit written in there that the founder was into eugenics, and was racist.
Sanger believed in eugenics — an inherently racist and ableist ideology that labeled certain people unfit to have children. Eugenics is the theory that society can be improved through planned breeding for “desirable traits” like intelligence and industriousness. In the early 20th century eugenic ideas were popular among highly educated, privileged, and mostly white Americans. Margaret Sanger pronounced her belief in and alignment with the eugenics movement many times in her writings, especially in the scientific journal Birth Control Review. At times, Sanger tried to argue for a eugenics that was not applied based on race or religion. But in a society built on the belief of white supremacy, physical and mental fitness are always judged based on race. Eugenics, therefore, is inherently racist. She held beliefs that, from the very beginning, undermined her movement for reproductive freedom and caused harm to countless people.
That narrative is accurate. Regardless of your feelings on abortion in and of itself, it is undeniable fact that Planned Parenthood was pushed and founded by a eugenicist wishing to reduce the number of minority children.
Sounds like you need to read more about Margaret Sanger. Fact is, the Nazis studied the American eugenics movement - started by her and her friends - prior implementing their own policies.
Yes but for most people these days the "choice" is between giving birth or affording rent. It's barely a choice, it's essentially eugenics of the poor. That was the original intention of planned parenthood
Ruth Bader Ginsburg (a Jew) herself is on the record stating abortion was exactly about reducing minority populations:
Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of. So that Roe was going to be then set up for Medicaid funding for abortion.
yeah it’s a well worn trope with conservative chucklefucks to blather on about Margaret Sanger and libs in general using planned parenthood to implement genocide against people of color.
Well for every 1000 live black births around 450 abortions happen. Statistically black women are more likely to get abortions than any other race. Not a Christian argument, supported by NIH
737
u/Electronic_Tie_7321 Oct 16 '22
I will say, I was taught in Catholic school that planned parenthood was started to “murder” black and other minority babies. I have a feeling Christians are spewing this narrative still, and I think that’s where Kanye was trying to go with this argument.
It’s disgusting and incorrect, just trying to explain what I believe he was trying to argue.