(07-24-2015, 10:39 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Again this is pure gibberish.
What race is poor? There are more poor white people than any other race.
This act is getting old. You are starting to bore me again.
According to you Only the non poor can have as many children as they wish. Yet in stats those who are losing babies to abortions are blacks and Hispanics.
Your advocating pp policy which according to the stats has shown to be eliminating minority children at quite a high number.
So are you supporting PP policy? Because if you are then you support that they are eliminating minorities at a very high rate vs whites. And thats leaving economic issues aside.
Where do you stand on their actions? The stars show what their policies are producing. Less minorities....
So are you supporting PP policy? Because if you are then you support that they are eliminating minorities at a very high rate vs whites. And thats leaving economic issues aside.
No it isn't leaving economic issues aside. It is directly related to economic issues.
No one is forcing these women to get abortions. They decide to get them because it is more of a benefit to them than a damage. This has nothing to do with eugenics.
I am not goinjg to keep saying the same thing oiver and over again. This game is getting boring.
(07-24-2015, 11:00 PM)fredtoast Wrote: No it isn't leaving economic issues aside. It is directly related to economic issues.
No one is forcing these women to get abortions. They decide to get them because it is more of a benefit to them than a damage. This has nothing to do with eugenics.
I am not goinjg to keep saying the same thing oiver and over again. This game is getting boring.
First off you read it wrong. Regardless of the economic issue (will get to that shortly) the actual effect is more blacks and Hispanic babies being killed.
Now you keep asserting this is an economic advantage for these women. This is exactly from the negro project. You keep preaching the same eugenics nonsense of Sanger, Malthus, and Ernst. Don't you find it odd that your using the same reasoning as Eugenicists were using back in the day? I don't think deep down your a Eugenicist.... But I do think you have allowed their nonsense to penetrate your thinking and its clouded your judgement on matters such as these...
Yeah there is no gun to anyones head to get an abortion. Your right about that.... But they are told from a very early age that it's ok to have an abortion for financial reasons, personal reasons, whatever...
Instead of telling them that they are taking away a life. They tell them things like its a lump of cells. ... Which coincidently they are selling off to the highest bidder.
Quote: she argued that birth control clinics, or bureaus, should be established in which men and women will be taught the science of parenthood and the science of breeding. For this was the way to breed out of the race the scourges of transmissible disease, mental defect, poverty, lawlessness, crime … since these classes would be decreasing in number instead of breeding like weeds [emphasis added].16
Her program called for women to receive birth control advice in various situations, including where:
the woman or man had a transmissible disease such as insanity, feeble-mindedness, epilepsy, syphilis, etc.;
the children already born were subnormal or feeble-minded;
the father’s wages were inadequate … to provide for more children. Sanger said such a plan would … reduce the birthrate among the diseased, the sickly, the poverty stricken and anti-social classes, elements unable to provide for themselves, and the burden of which we are all forced to carry.
Quote: Many Americansblack and whiteare unaware of Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s Negro Project. Sanger created this program in 1939, after the organization changed its name from the American Birth Control League (ABCL) to the Birth Control Federation of America (BCFA).1
The aim of the program was to restrictmany believe exterminatethe black population. Under the pretense of better health and family planning, Sanger cleverly implemented her plan. What’s more shocking is Sanger’s beguilement of black America’s crème de la crèmethose prominent, well educated and well-to-dointo executing her scheme. Some within the black elite saw birth control as a means to attain economic empowerment,elevate the race and garner the respect of whites.
The Negro Project has had lasting repercussions in the black community: We have become victims of genocide by our own hands, cried Hunter at the Say So march.
Malthusian Eugenics
IntroductionMalthusian EugenicsThe Harlem ClinicBirth Control as a SolutionWeb of DeceitBetter Health for 13,000,000Scientific RacismSanger’s LegacyUntangling the Deceptive WebEnd Notes
Margaret Sanger aligned herself with the eugenicists whose ideology prevailed in the early 20th century. Eugenicists strongly espoused racial supremacy and purity, particularly of the Aryan race. Eugenicists hoped to purify the bloodlines and improve the race by encouraging the fit to reproduce and the unfit to restrict their reproduction. They sought to contain the inferior races through segregation, sterilization, birth control and abortion.
Sanger embraced Malthusian eugenics. Thomas Robert Malthus, a 19th-century cleric and professor of political economy, believed a population time bomb threatened the existence of the human race.2 He viewed social problems such as poverty, deprivation and hunger as evidence of this population crisis. According to writer George Grant, Malthus condemned charities and other forms of benevolence, because he believed they only exacerbated the problems. His answer was to restrict population growth of certain groups of people.3 His theories of population growth and economic stability became the basis for national and international social policy. Grant quotes from Malthus’ magnum opus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions from 1798 to 1826:
All children born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to a desired level, must necessarily perish, unless room is made for them by the deaths of grown persons. We should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality.4
Malthus’ disciples believed if Western civilization were to survive, the physically unfit, the materially poor, the spiritually diseased, the racially inferior, and the mentally incompetent had to be suppressed and isolatedor even, perhaps, eliminated. His disciples felt the subtler and more scientific approaches of education, contraception, sterilizationand abortion were more practical and acceptable ways to ease the pressures of the alleged overpopulation.
(07-24-2015, 10:24 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: So by your own account you can't or won't disprove me. You will just Attack my character instead and call me a liar. Which is the most uncivilized form of any debate. Not sure why you feel the need to stomp your feet and cross your arms. This is a new expierence with you.... I have come to expect small and petty from some here but I always thought you were above that sort of behavior.
If you can't stay on the Merits while staying civil then maybe this isn't the thread for you. I would like to believe this is a singular event with you since you have always added to a civil discussion. Hopefully next time you will be able to maintain your usual civil behavior instead of being dramatic and attacking anyone's character .
There is no "or won't," there is only that it can't be disproven. This is why anecdotal evidence is meaningless in an actual civilized debate, a real one. Play the high ground all you like on this one, your inability to think critically or apply logic to situations in just about every argument I've ever seen you engaged in on here shows to me that you know nothing of actual debate. That's not an attack of character, just an observation I have had.
Playing chess with pigeons...
Edit: I had another post after this one that was there and has now disappeared. Not sure what is up with that. Anyway, I'm done with this one. Anecdotal evidence and a video that could just as easily have been staged and/or edited to achieve the desired result aimed at the targeted audience of the biased and naive that in addition makes a fallacious leap in logic shows no proof of anything. Maybe I am letting my emotions get the best of me, because I am so tired of seeing the failings of our education system present in the lack of ability to think critically or apply logic to things. It makes me frustrated and fearful for our future. Seeing it at work, seeing it at here. Just take a toll.
(07-25-2015, 07:22 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: There is no "or won't," there is only that it can't be disproven. This is why anecdotal evidence is meaningless in an actual civilized debate, a real one. Play the high ground all you like on this one, your inability to think critically or apply logic to situations in just about every argument I've ever seen you engaged in on here shows to me that you know nothing of actual debate. That's not an attack of character, just an observation I have had.
Playing chess with pigeons...
Edit: I had another post after this one that was there and has now disappeared. Not sure what is up with that. Anyway, I'm done with this one. Anecdotal evidence and a video that could just as easily have been staged and/or edited to achieve the desired result aimed at the targeted audience of the biased and naive that in addition makes a fallacious leap in logic shows no proof of anything. Maybe I am letting my emotions get the best of me, because I am so tired of seeing the failings of our education system present in the lack of ability to think critically or apply logic to things. It makes me frustrated and fearful for our future. Seeing it at work, seeing it at here. Just take a toll.
Good day.
Kinda uppity don't you think? Guy shows a video to support his assertion and to refute being called a liar (what happened to innocent until proven guilty?) and the best defense is the video could have been edited. He posts video proof and you post that you have acquaintances. Your acquaintances could be staged/ or edited; yet, no one has the poor taste to call you a liar. Then it becomes a simple case of you're not as wise as me.
Of course he can be proved wrong. All you have to do is provide a statement from a PP spokesman that states donors cannot earmark donations for a particular group. You do work with folk there it should be easy enough. Simply calling someone a liar and stating that you are smarter than them is only proof condescension.
(07-25-2015, 08:53 AM)bfine32 Wrote: Kinda uppity don't you think? Guy shows a video to support his assertion and to refute being called a liar (what happened to innocent until proven guilty?) and the best defense is the video could have been edited. He posts video proof and you post that you have acquaintances. Your acquaintances could be staged/ or edited; yet, no one has the poor taste to call you a liar. Then it becomes a simple case of you're not as wise as me.
Of course he can be proved wrong. All you have to do is provide a statement from a PP spokesman that states donors cannot earmark donations for a particular group. You do work with folk there it should be easy enough. Simply calling someone a liar and stating that you are smarter than them is only proof condescension.
All of this would be a valid argument if I had ever said that it hadn't happened before, or if it doesn't happen at all. Neither of which are things I said. I said he never called and did that, and I was also saying that me calling my local PP would not yield the same result. And what you say as something that could prove him wrong is actually not. That would not disprove his anecdotal evidence for a number of reasons. Anecdotal evidence can neither be proven or disproven to be entirely accurate, which is why it is not valid in actual debate.
And I never said I was smarter than anyone. One does not have to be intelligent to think critically or apply logic. They just have to learn how to think a certain way.
I know I said I was done earlier, but I have a pet peeve for straw man attacks. I know I shouldn't let you goad me with them as that is pretty much 95% of your interaction with me.
(07-25-2015, 11:30 AM)Belsnickel Wrote: All of this would be a valid argument if I had ever said that it hadn't happened before, or if it doesn't happen at all. Neither of which are things I said. I said he never called and did that, and I was also saying that me calling my local PP would not yield the same result. And what you say as something that could prove him wrong is actually not. That would not disprove his anecdotal evidence for a number of reasons. Anecdotal evidence can neither be proven or disproven to be entirely accurate, which is why it is not valid in actual debate.
And I never said I was smarter than anyone. One does not have to be intelligent to think critically or apply logic. They just have to learn how to think a certain way.
I know I said I was done earlier, but I have a pet peeve for straw man attacks. I know I shouldn't let you goad me with them as that is pretty much 95% of your interaction with me.
so either we think your way and be "reasonable" or we think independently and just be flat out wrong.
(07-25-2015, 02:57 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: so either we think your way and be "reasonable" or we think independently and just be flat out wrong.
Spoken like a true progressive.
Thinking critically and using logic and reason is thinking independently. It's not telling you what to think but giving you the tools to come to a well informed decision based on the information in front of you. If you think that believing falsely drawn conclusions from edited evidence is thinking independently then I just don't know what else to say to you.
(07-25-2015, 03:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Thinking critically and using logic and reason is thinking independently. It's not telling you what to think but giving you the tools to come to a well informed decision based on the information in front of you. If you think that believing falsely drawn conclusions from edited evidence is thinking independently then I just don't know what else to say to you.
Dang....I just now figured out that you are Matt, lol! This is 'cracky.
(07-25-2015, 03:52 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Thinking critically and using logic and reason is thinking independently. It's not telling you what to think but giving you the tools to come to a well informed decision based on the information in front of you. If you think that believing falsely drawn conclusions from edited evidence is thinking independently then I just don't know what else to say to you.
I watched the whole tape. There is no exaggeration... Why do you keep saying this.... Because pp is saying it cover their rear ends?
Why do you blindly believe anything they say? You said you didn't watch the complete videos so your basing this all off of what pp responded. I'm sure that's not biased at all.
And on the donations .... Maybe your friend woukdnt take a donation for a black only abortion but these are independent offices. Which is why they negotiate baby organ prices. So each office doesn't "make too much" So your telling me that no pp accepts donations earmarked for abortions to any specific race.....
(07-25-2015, 06:29 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: I watched the whole tape. There is no exaggeration... Why do you keep saying this.... Because pp is saying it cover their rear ends?
Why do you blindly believe anything they say? You said you didn't watch the complete videos so your basing this all off of what pp responded. I'm sure that's not biased at all.
And on the donations .... Maybe your friend woukdnt take a donation for a black only abortion but these are independent offices. Which is why they negotiate baby organ prices. So each office doesn't "make too much" So your telling me that no pp accepts donations earmarked for abortions to any specific race.....
They refer to it as "helping" african Americans
I've actually not read or heard any of the responses from Planned Parenthood. Hard for me to blindly accept something I have not heard or seen. The rest of your post is lacking in comprehension of everything I have been saying.
(07-25-2015, 09:29 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It is. There is no logical argument to deny it.
And you realize your asserting the exact same argument that Sanger and Eugenicists did back in the day. If it's been an economic advantage the why are they still poor? And why are they killing blacks at the highest rate?
So based on what you keep saying ... you stand with the Eugenicists. Gotcha.
(07-25-2015, 09:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've actually not read or heard any of the responses from Planned Parenthood. Hard for me to blindly accept something I have not heard or seen. The rest of your post is lacking in comprehension of everything I have been saying.
(07-25-2015, 11:23 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: And you realize your asserting the exact same argument that Sanger and Eugenicists did back in the day. If it's been an economic advantage the why are they still poor? And why are they killing blacks at the highest rate?
So based on what you keep saying ... you stand with the Eugenicists. Gotcha.
My claim has nothing to do with eugenics. Eugenics has to do with improving society based on genetic selection. I am not saying anything like that. I am only talking about the individual. And it is clearly a benefit.
You obviously do not even understand what eugenics means if you think my argument is based in any way on eugenic principles.
And why are they still poor? C'mon man that is a joke of an argument. It is like saying all medicine is worthless because we have been using medicine for many years and we are still getting sick. That is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. There is zero logic in that argument.
(07-25-2015, 09:06 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I've actually not read or heard any of the responses from Planned Parenthood. Hard for me to blindly accept something I have not heard or seen.
You have been provided with video evidence. You seem more than willing to blindly accept they don't do it.
(07-25-2015, 11:30 PM)fredtoast Wrote: My claim has nothing to do with eugenics. Eugenics has to do with improving society based on genetic selection. I am not saying anything like that. I am only talking about the individual. And it is clearly a benefit.
You obviously do not even understand what eugenics means if you think my argument is based in any way on eugenic principles.
And why are they still poor? C'mon man that is a joke of an argument. It is like saying all medicine is worthless because we have been using medicine for many years and we are still getting sick. That is the dumbest argument I have ever heard. There is zero logic in that argument.
Your using the exact same argument to make your point. .... If Eugenicists have been using that since the 1910's.... Yet we are still killing more blacks. The economic reasoning is a false reason. it's just an excuse to promote abortions within the group's they want....
Your reasons are the exact same ones that were used in the negro project. Was that a good thing?
Thought this was a fair debate on the matter this morning. It starts out with some hillary Clinton email talk but most of it is on they pp controversy.
![[Image: bfine-guns2.png]](https://i.ibb.co/YBkDQJV/bfine-guns2.png)
![[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]](https://i.imgur.com/4CV0TeR.png)
