Pro-Choice Advocates Are Trying To Commit Genocide Against Blacks Through Abortion?

Are these people friggin serious?! What part of "voluntary" do they not understand?!
 
Pro-Choice Advocates Are Trying To Commit Genocide Against Blacks Through Abortion?
That's stupid. The black population (as percentage of US population) has been growing since abortion has been legal.

Dumbass fundies would rather see more blacks (and people of all races) living in poverty than abort.
 
That's stupid. The black population (as percentage of US population) has been growing since abortion has been legal.

Dumbass fundies would rather see more blacks (and people of all races) living in poverty than abort.

Oh crap! Narz has figured us out! We want everyone to live in poverty! Run for the hills!
 
Have to go with Contre here - whether or not there are elements of eugenic present in parts of the planned parenthood movement (not impossible, but likely WAY exaggerated by the pro-life movement...not that exaggeratign the unsavory associations of some of their enemies is something the pro-life are alone in doing)...specie?

Endangered specie, which specifically brings to mind (at least to me) the concept of a (non-human) animal specie, at that?

I can see what they were trying for, but the fact that not one of them woke up to the fact that they were calling blacks a separate specie, and then adding a none-too-subtle reference to animal life, is rather disturbing.
 
Have to go with Contre here - whether or not there are elements of eugenic present in parts of the planned parenthood movement (not impossible, but likely WAY exaggerated by the pro-life movement...not that exaggeratign the unsavory associations of some of their enemies is something the pro-life are alone in doing)...specie?
Not to mention that eugenics has historically been a favored policy of the far-right to try to control the breeding of "welfare mothers" and other "undesirables", including the use of forced sterlization. While Margaret Sanger did indeed believe in eugenics, as many did back then, she wasn't advocating euthenasia or any of the other more radical measures which were so popular with the far-right and the Nazis. I think it is ironic, as well as highly disingenuous, that some in the pro-life crowd are now trying to use this past affiliation against the pro-choice crowd when so many of their own founders held much stronger beliefs in this regard.

I can see what they were trying for, but the fact that not one of them woke up to the fact that they were calling blacks a separate specie, and then adding a none-too-subtle reference to animal life, is rather disturbing.
Yes, it is. But such is the nature of propaganda. It can frequently backfire on you if you aren't very careful.
 
That's not forcefully withholding people from getting food. That's not starving people. How on earth did people in America not starve to death before FDR came along.

you'd steal. so if you wanna go back to that, let's do it.
 
you'd steal. so if you wanna go back to that, let's do it.
Well, that was honest-to-goodness private party stealing - you didn't steal, you didn't eat. Now we have the government controlling then means of thieving, giving less incentive for an individual to do a honest day's crime spree.
 
Oh crap! Narz has figured us out! We want everyone to live in poverty! Run for the hills!
I didn't say anti-abortion fundies want everyone to live in poverty, I said they would rather have unwanted children in poverty than aborted fetuses. That's not really controversial.
 
Not to mention that eugenics has historically been a favored policy of the far-right to try to control the breeding of "welfare mothers" and other "undesirables", including the use of forced sterlization. While Margaret Sanger did indeed believe in eugenics, as many did back then, she wasn't advocating euthenasia or any of the other more radical measures which were so popular with the far-right and the Nazis. I think it is ironic, as well as highly disingenuous, that some in the pro-life crowd are now trying to use this past affiliation against the pro-choice crowd when so many of their own founders held much stronger beliefs in this regard.

Yeah she only advocated the sterilisation of minorities and abortions for black children. What a gentle heart.
 
Yeah she only advocated the sterilisation of minorities and abortions for black children. What a gentle heart.

Why is it that so many "Pro-lifers" get all sappy over anyone aborting ANY fetus and then turn around and yell "support our troops" so that they can go shoot someone else's child. I mean if they are so "pro-life" then maybe they ought to oppose the wholesale slaughter of it in war. What a bunch of hypocrits. :mad:

Heck, lets save an unconscious fetus so that it can grow up to shoot another human being who is thinking, feeling, and conscious. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
 
Why is it that so many "Pro-lifers" get all sappy over anyone aborting ANY fetus and then turn around and yell "support our troops" so that they can go shoot someone else's child. I mean if they are so "pro-life" then maybe they ought to oppose the wholesale slaughter of it in war. What a bunch of hypocrits. :mad:

Heck, lets save an unconscious fetus so that it can grow up to shoot another human being who is thinking, feeling, and conscious. Makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Yeah lets kill every human because they might kill somebody ;)
 
That's stupid. The black population (as percentage of US population) has been growing since abortion has been legal.

Dumbass fundies would rather see more blacks (and people of all races) living in poverty than abort.

I swear to God, the more of this forum I read, the more I think that most people on the left are closet racists.
 
You don't want abortion but you don't want to pay for welfare either.
Is the choice that clear cut? Support abortion or support a welfare caste?
 
I swear to God, the more of this forum I read, the more I think that most people on the left are closet racists.

This is the second time you've said this.

I wish you wouldn't form this opinion. It's likely not especially true (other than the fact that most people are racist), and you can be quite sure that the majority of 'leftists' (whatever that is) do not intend to hold racist views. If you start the form this opinion, you're going to fall for a psychological trick called the 'confirmation bias'.

Additionally, it's concerning that you're making broad stereotypes about a negative attribute associated with a group of people ... isn't that kinda what racism is?
 
Yeah she only advocated the sterilisation of minorities and abortions for black children. What a gentle heart.
Actually, no. She didn't advocate the sterilization of minorities. That is, unless you think all minorities are mentally ******ed. And once again, believing in eugenics was a very common position back then. For instance, Sweden practiced voluntary sterilization of mental patients until 1948. And the Sexual Sterilization Acts were not repealed by Alberta and British Columbia until 1972.

And Sanger wanted black women to be able to have abortions without risking their own lives.

What a terrible person she must have been for merely disagreeing with your own personal opinion, as so many others do on this subject.

Is the choice that clear cut? Support abortion or support a welfare caste?

Is the rhetoric that inconsistent? Incessantly complain about "welfare mothers" having babies they can't afford, but at the same time not want to give them the opportunity to deal with it in a rational and adult way? And when they do, insinuate that anybody who advocates pro-choice are engaging in genocide against blacks by doing so?
 
Top Bottom