This is why the Progressive media is the Ministry of Truth ..

[UCFBS]

Well, I see my defense of Planned Parenthood and Sanger went unnoticed by the Progressives here.

 

[NinjaKnight]

Well, I see my defense of Planned Parenthood and Sanger went unnoticed by the Progressives here.

dude, everything you post goes unnoticed when you are typing 10 page long novelletes about how 9mm is deadlier than 5.56. No one gives a shit what you have to say. How have you not figured this out yet?

 

[UCFBS]

dude, everything you post goes unnoticed when you are typing 10 page long novelletes about how 9mm is deadlier than 5.56. No one gives a shit what you have to say. How have you not figured this out yet?

And yet ... my posts seem to upset you enough. One of these days people will care about the truth, instead of the political alignments and proving others wrong. You and I actually agree far, far more than we disagree.

I'm just trying to get you to see the obviousness of the truth.

But in your world, we need to heed people who want to outlaw the .223, which means all semi-auto rifles. And then, because semi-auto pistols can shoot and kill well in urban areas and have the same size magazines, we also label them assault weapons, and need to ban them with the rifles.

That's the world you create, herding the media sheep, agreeing with them.

Com'mon man, you're much more intelligent than that!

 

[sk8knight]

And they were around with Planned Parenthood was?

Especially the pre-'60s abortion Planned Parenthood (BTW, federal funds cannot be used for abortions)? Back when men could impregnate their wives, and the wives could not say 'no'? Back when general practioners didn't understand female anatomy, and gynecology really wasn't much of a profession (and nothing like today).

It's that history I was referring to!

Just like the NRA was not lobbying the US federal government until the late '60s as well. People love to demonize the real histories of the experts when there was no others!

Yes, every large organization will have bad actors. Just like the Parkland shooter was a NRA sanctioned champ.

We can play that all day ... all large organizations have bad apples. Move on ...

Now hold on! With this statement, you basically confirmed you're ignorant of their history.

First off, eugenics in the '20s was not the same as the '30s and '40s Nazi Eugenics. It was very commonly accepted in medical science at the time that families with some diseases should consider not breeding, and consider sterilization, to prevent passing on select genes. This was before anti-biotics and other, modern medicine.

Secondly, we are now, today, back to talking about the same, "eugenic" principals, regarding bacteria and superbugs, but we don't call it "eugenics." We're now calling it many other things (which is a whole post on its own).

But most argumentative ...

Back in the '20s, you had impregnation rates among the poor and sick, and all Sanger did was advocate people have the option to choose sterilization. She never combined eugenics with sterilization -- much less forced -- but that has not stopped people from combining the two and labeling her everything from a racist to a Nazi.

Planned Parenthood has been the authority on female health for over a century when no other options existed and female health was largely ignored by the medical community, and women had 0 rights!

Just like the NRA has been the authority on rifles for nearly a century and a half!

The anti-PP and anti-NRA non-sense is something the sensationalist US media invented and evolved over the last half-century. Which is why I wish people would stop the sheepish BS.

Sanger expressed thought that they should prevent the over-fertility of the physically and mentally defective. She also stated that enforced motherhood is the greatest threat to life and liberty. I think there are many that would strongly disagree with her version of eugenics even though she tried to distance herself from the racial aspect.

Fair enough about historical tones, I’ll defer to you on that because I haven’t researched and don’t want to right now. I must have misread your post because I thought you were speaking more recently. In current times, we need to acknowledge the alternatives that grew despite the government and lobbying benefits that PP has had and don’t have either the stigma (perception is part of it, true or not) nor their mission to provide abortions and their history of activities around that. But this doesn’t need to become a PP thread.

 

[UCFBS]

Sanger expressed thought that they should prevent the over-fertility of the physically and mentally defective. She also stated that enforced motherhood is the greatest threat to life and liberty. I think there are many that would strongly disagree with her version of eugenics even though she tried to distance herself from the racial aspect.

Did she ever argue the government should force sterilization? She only argued that people, individually, should have the right to sterilization by choice.

Fair enough about historical tones, I’ll defer to you on that because I haven’t researched and don’t want to right now.

Exactly! And that's the thing ...

The left gets their information on the NRA from the Progressive media (and, quite humorously, totally ignore the USCCA, NSSF and others), and the right gets their information on Planned Parenthood from the Conservative media. At some point we have to choose to be objective, not subjective, and look outside the media hyperbole. That's what critically thinking Liberals and Libertarians do.

Both the NRA and Planned Parenthood are the earliest experts in their fields. Now while I've been critical of both the NRA (especially compared to how the USSCA handles things), and Planned Parenthood, anyone who understands their history understand what they both still do 97% of the time.

I must have misread your post because I thought you were speaking more recently. In current times, we need to acknowledge the alternatives that grew despite the government and lobbying benefits that PP has had and don’t have either the stigma (perception is part of it, true or not) nor their mission to provide abortions and their history of activities around that. But this doesn’t need to become a PP thread.

Again, they both still do what they originally did 97% of the time.

Do you understand how much healthcare Planned Parenthood provides women who cannot afford healthcare? Do you also understand, even today, how many Church-owned medical facilities -- from general practitioners to hospitals -- do not even mention, much less offer, various options out of political reasons? E.g., most refuse to even offer the option to tie a woman's tubes after pregnancy (and that's just one example).

Listen, I'm the first guy that stands up for the Conservatives, against Progressives, when they say their healthcare shouldn't have to provide various options, especially birth control, because entities like Planned Parenthood exist. But let's understand that Planned Parenthood spends nearly all of their time focused on women's health, from chemistry to other healthcare, that has nothing to do with abortions (only 3% -- and government funds cannot be used for them), let alone any type of birth control.

I stick up for the NRA as well, as their lobbying arm is just one small part of everything they do.

Both the NRA and Planned Parenthood's lobbying efforts have been directly proportional to the amount of demonization directed at them by the US media, which has only grown since the late '60s.