Planned Parenthood in 1952: Abortion “kills the life of a baby”
The scientific fact that an abortion ends the life of a living human being isn’t so convenient these days for Planned Parenthood – after all they are now the largest abortion chain in the country. Back in 1952 before Planned Parenthood was an abortion operation, they sure had a more accurate understanding of science before their twisted abortion ideology of today took over. Just look at their pamphlet below that states that abortion “kills the life of a baby after it has begun.”
Popularity: 27% [?]
32 Comments
→
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
- ProWomanProLife » 1952: When even Planned Parenthood understood abortion
- That was then… « Don Surber
- Planned Parenthood in 1952: Abortion “kills the life of a baby” « THE BLACK KETTLE
- Planned Parenthood 1952: Abortion ‘Kills the Life of a Baby,’ Danger to Mother | Catholic Exchange
- Obama and abortion - the current record (3/15/10) - Politics and Other Controversies -Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives, Liberals, Third Parties, Left-Wing, Right-Wing, Congress, President - Page 13 - City-Data Forum
- PP killed “babies” when killing babies was cool | No Apologies
- “it kills the life of a baby” « native pilgrim
- Planned Parenthood Says Abortion Kills Babies « Tracts & Treatises
- “Why Pro-Choice Is Losing” « Pro-Life Hotline
Great find, their answers have changed now for their own brainwashing tactics. “Plan Your Children for Health and Happiness?” or “Kill Your Babies for Your Own Health and Happiness.”
Planned Parenthood has always been pro-abortion– Margaret Sanger famously said “The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” But back in the 50s, the pro-life majority was so strong that PP had to pretend they opposed abortion in order to get anywhere. Let’s bring that pro-life majority back!
How does one find a copy of this pamphlet?? I would love to have a copy to use in my discussions and debates with pro-aborts!
Sanger also said “To each group we explained what contraception was; that abortion was the wrong way—no matter how early it was performed it was taking life; that contraception was the better way, the safer way—it took a little time, a little trouble, but was well worth while in the long run, because life had not yet begun.”.
Also, Gallup says the pro-life majority IS back!
The reality people don’t want to face is that they rationalize, justify and excuse the taking of life every day – one value or priority placed over another and then acted upon
it’s so easy to stand on the soapbox of sanctimony and self-righteousness
yet it is hypocritical
where did an individual get his ideas about the value of life? any life? how does he decide the value of a life? like a free market principle, each decides the value of a life before it’s taken, then either leaves it to live or takes it – for whatever reasons the individual justifies.
my favorite question to the anti-Iraq war folk: you dislike “why” we went into Iraq, okay. Is there any reason you WOULD have gone into Iraq?
whatever their reason, it reveals the free market principle of individual value placed by which to act in one’s self-interest
in other words: it’s all subjective
all interest is self-interest
the taking of life is the taking of life – irrespective of an individual’s rationalizations, justifications or excuses
Kelsey, prior to the acceptance of abortion in the late 60′s, you are right to point out, that it was because of societal norms that Sanger and Planned Parenthood held the position that abortion was bad or wrong. There are claims of Planned Parenthood notes indicating that this was an intentional position, admonishing Sanger to not publicly support abortion in the 50′s. But long before all of this, in the 20′s and early 30′s, Sanger was an avowed eugenicist. She and her Planned Parenthood organization had always been committed to eradicating the “disgenic” and “human weeds” of which she often spoke, a primary force behind her contraceptive efforts. Abortion is simply a logical outgrowth of that eugenic movement.
This amazing archival find should be published very widely. It also underscores how important it is (in a democratic society) that the culture be challenged to place its sexual ethics on a stable platform. Clearly, PP in 1952 could not dare, or didn’t even THINK of daring culture to abort children. It could not politically afford to run counter in a culture that was profoundly more pro-life in its attitude. Evidently, in the 1950s, there was enough (at least) vestigial Christian belief to keep the secular wolves in their place. Hence, we need Revival among our populace in order to achieve this life-affirming sanity again.
WOW, great archive material, keep up the great work!!!!!
Although the paragraph dealing with abortion is refreshingly honest, doesn’t anyone notice the other misinformation in this handout?
“The method your doctor prescribes for you is completely harmless.”
and –
“birth control cannot hurt you in any way.”
Now that was really some wishful thinking!
http://www.uvalies.org/
Sean, you said it perfectly: “doesn’t anyone notice the OTHER misinformation in this handout?”
You just pointed out that along w/ the info on birth control, the info on abortion was also incorrect.
Obviously, we have come a long way w/ many things, people. If you are a surgeon, are you going to go grab a book on how to do surgery from the 50s/60s? I sure hope not.
Med Student, enlighten us all… Does abortion end the life of a fetus or not?
AS for using a book on surgery from the 50s/60s…. This is not old technical data but a basic stance on the beginning of life. If modern medicine has any effect on our opinion of when life starts, it would only lead us to believe it starts earlier. We have ultra sound images and fiber optic cameras, surgeons operate on these little ones in the womb. When then this pamphlet was written all the evidence we had was that the heart beat could be detected and the mother could feel her baby stir (and really that is enough isn’t it).
Excellent find… its about time that someone tells the truth about abortion. Its not just a fetus (meaning offspring) inside of a woman, its a real baby.
Thank God and those who uncovered this pamphlet
Could we have a link created to a full size pdf copy ot the document, so that one can print, blow it up and publicly display it and explain how PP had to pretend they opposed abortion in order to get anywhere…i.e. they are deceivers.
Sanger/PP wanted “more from the fit, less from the unfit.” Abortion was okay for the poor, the mentally incompetent, etc., but not for the well-to-do, the elite, etc. It was a double standard based on eugenics. Hitler loved it. See http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100029002/black-women-are-more-likely-to-have-abortions-than-white-women-guardian-icon-marie-stopes-would-be-pleased.
Notice to SEAN who quoted certain stuff as incorrect information:
As to your first point, READ things in context, the sentence before places where the stand is: Birth control means the use of medically approved methods to POSTPONE pregnancy. It does not say TERMINATE. Birth control and abortion are two very different things. Birth control STOPS you falling pregnant, where as ABORTION kills a child because you were so careless as not to use BIRTH CONTROL.
As to your second point, apply the principle of context – Birth Control refers to methods that STOP you falling pregnant, and different methods suit different women, for example the pill may cause severe side effects for the one women, while it is perfect for another.
Notice to MED STUDENT: Exactly WHAT information is incorrect on abortion? If you watch the National Geographic video on Conception to Birth, you will notice that within four weeks the child is already physically visible. Not to notice what happens spiritually, as if you are not a committed Christian or Jew, you will not be concerned about what God thinks.
I really hate when people refer to Pro-Choicers as ‘Pro Abortion’ no one is PRO abortion. Nobody wakes up and is like ‘Man, I could really use an abortion today!’ or ‘Hmmm how can I get me some MORE abortions!!’
It’s an unfortunate situation and while I would probably not ever get one myself, I do not think it is my place to say what someone else chooses to do with HER BODY.
Instead of arguing over what’s right and wrong why don’t we work on reducing the overall number of abortions that occur?
“I really hate when people refer to Pro-Choicers as ‘Pro Abortion’ no one is PRO abortion.”
— Have you seen: “I’m definitely pro-abortion” http://youtube.com/watch?v=Rh8oz3orpZY
“I do not think it is my place to say what someone else chooses to do with HER BODY. ”
— So you are against abortion because you believe someone shouldn’t for a baby girl against her will to be ripped apart?
Watch this video: http://youtube.com/watch?v=w4e4NiHUPbk
“Instead of arguing over what’s right and wrong why don’t we work on reducing the overall number of abortions that occur?”
— If something is right then why reduce the number? If something is wrong like murder or slavery, simply reducing it is not enough. Would you be content to have a goal simply being the reduction of slavery?
If you believe abortions should be reduced, I ask you, why?
@Kelly. I don’t think people should tell women what to do with their bodies, either. The fact is, however, that the fetus is not part of her body. It has different DNA, may have a different blood type, and may even be a different sex. His mother’s womb is his temporary place of residence. He is not part of her body, only dependent upon it and living in it.
@Context please! – You are wrong. Birth control works by stopping ovulation but it also keeps a fertilized egg from implanting in the endometrium in the uterus. If the fertilized egg can not implant, it starves and dies. This is a medical abortion. It is no different than the morning after pill which is a high dose birth control pill to prevent implantation. In both, a fertilized egg, a baby, dies.
“no one is PRO abortion”
Except for the people who make money by performing abortions, of course.
Lie to me once shame on you, lie to me twice shame on me.
The pursuit of getting public buy-in for contraception was always a means to the end of getting public buy-in for abortion. If you cheapen a sacred act then you can cheapen the result of that act. Thank you for posting this information. I learned a lot from the flyer and the resulting posts.
Kelly~ Like everything that becomes unpopular they have to change the name to hide the truth. So keep Pro-Abortion in the mix. There isn’t any hiding of anything, you know what it is. As for your other point, yes people DO wake up and say, I think I’ll have an abortion today. When I worked in the doctors office a patient had an appt because something still wasn’t right 2 weeks after an abortion (and NOT done by us). Later in the day she called back to see if she should still come in. Of course I had to tell her yes. Then she proceeded to ask me if we could also do a pregnancy test because she was still sexually active. This girl was 18, black, and didn’t want her parents to know. We need to educate these people with the truth and not pussy foot around it!
As for a woman’s right with her own body… who the h*ll is speaking out for the baby? This baby has no voice unless WE give it one! The woman already made her choice to drop her pants!