Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Harvest of Shame
The year was 1985, and the place was Jerusalem. A capacity crowd had assembled in Yad Vashem to listen to 30 Auschwitz survivors describing the barbarism of Josef Mengele. Vera Alexander, 62, described how Mengele pampered one young lady during her pregnancy, only to personally tear the baby from the womb and hurl the live child into an oven because it wasn’t a twin.
Vera Kriegel, 60, told of seeing Auschwitz guards crush the skulls of babies with their rifle butts, a practice that I assume Planned Parenthood would disavow on purely economic grounds. Besides, as Planned Parenthood’s Dr. Mary Gatter explained with the nonchalance of someone describing a new candy bar, babies can now be finished off in ways that are “less crunchy.” Which is to say, their young lives can be exterminated while keeping certain organs intact for the purpose of selling them. Indeed, as one Planned Parenthood “care provider” said, “Sometimes, if we get, if someone delivers before we are able to see them for a procedure, then we are intact.”
Ms. Kriegel described the indescribable to the gathering in Jerusalem, back in 1985, recalling the sight of hundreds of human eyeballs pinned to the office wall in Dr. Josef Mengele’s little shop of atrocities. “It was like a collection of butterflies,” she recounted. There were of course still more horrors in the camp. “Usually you can see the whole brain come out,” said another doctor, Savita Ginde. “Here’s a stomach, kidney, heart,” Dr. Ginde explained.
Sorry, but I’m playing loose with the chronology here, because Dr. Ginde didn’t really ply her deadly trade for Dr. Mengele, but rather for Planned Parenthood. The difference? Whereas yesterday’s butchers pinned eyeballs to the wall, today’s dismember children and sift through their bloody remains in search of remunerative body parts. As the old Virginia Slims commercial used to say, “You’ve come a long way, baby.”
“C’mon Carter,” you say, “the Nazis were interested in outright genocide! You can’t reasonably compare that with Planned Parenthood now, can you?” Well, let’s do a little comparing, shall we? First, a look at the animating philosophy as described by Mengele himself:
Everything will end in catastrophe if natural selection is altered to the point that gifted people are overwhelmed by billions of morons. … we have to prevent the rise of the idiot masses.
Pretty harsh, no? Now, compare Mengele’s ghastly reasoning with the enlightened and tender-hearted philosophy of Planned Parenthood’s founder, Margaret Sanger:
A government which allows men and women to become parents whose records show insanity, feeble-mindedness, epilepsy, syphilis, pauperism, idiocy and various other transmissible defects, cannot be said to consider the welfare or happiness of the country or of the next generation. Billions are now spent on charities, both public and private, in the U.S.A. The normal and intelligent citizens are being taxed and drained and bled to keep alive an increasing horde of human beings who never should have been born into a civilized society.
And that, sports fans, stripped of its rhetorical and euphemistic finery, is liberal “compassion.” And you thought Donald Trump was crude! But the woman Hillary Clinton described as her “hero” wasn’t done:
Our “overhead” expense in segregating the delinquent, the defective and the dependent, in prisons, asylums and permanent homes, our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying … demonstrate our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism. No industrial corporation could maintain its existence upon such a foundation. Yet hardheaded “captains of industry,” financiers who pride themselves upon their cool-headed and keen-sighted business abilities are dropping millions into rosewater philanthropies and charities that are silly at best and vicious at worst. In our dealings with such elements there is a bland maladministration and misuse of huge sums that should in all righteousness be used for the development and education of the healthy elements of the community.
Well. That is certainly bracing! Notice how the quote fits neatly into the stereotype constructed by people such as Ms. Clinton to describe conservatives and yet … and yet it proceeds directly from the mind of Margaret Sanger, of whom Ms. Clinton rhapsodizes, “I am really in awe of her, there are a lot of lessons we can learn from her life.” What lessons are we to learn from a woman whose exertions in eugenics gave birth to an organization that locates 79% of its abortion clinics in minority neighborhoods?
“I admire Margaret Sanger enormously,” cooed Hillary, “her courage, her tenacity, her vision.” Was it the courage and tenacity to announce her vision — “Birth control is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, of preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defective” — that prompted Hillary Clinton to accept the Margaret Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood?
Describing Planned Parenthood as “the object of such a concerted attack for so many years, and it’s really an attack against a woman’s right to choose,” Ms. Clinton invites the question: a woman’s right to choose what, exactly? The right to choose what school her children may attend? The right to choose to arm herself in self-defense? The right to fight the unwanted sexual advances of Hillary’s husband? The right to practice her religion even if it offends gay activists? The right to resist those Obamacare mandates that violate a woman’s pro-life convictions? The right to choose an incandescent lightbulb? The right to purchase a large soda even if Michael Bloomberg doesn’t approve? The right to keep her doctor or health insurance? The right to put her Social Security contributions into her private account? The right to retain her earnings rather than see them apportioned out to strangers who didn’t earn them?
Of course not, for the “choice” that has become enshrined as a liberal sacrament begins and ends at the abortionist’s door. Through that door, as the Center for Medical Progress’s cameras confirm, the human capacity for savagery unfolds in all its depraved and bloody wretchedness. The camera focuses on a petri dish containing a petite foot here, a liver there, a small lump from which extends tiny human fingers, and, placed haphazardly on opposite sides of the dish, two minuscule human eyeballs that stare lifelessly, like those that adorned Josef Mengele’s wall 70 years earlier; historical descendants, victims of a timeless evil, bearing silent and unflinching testiment to Mengele’s statement: “The more we do to you, the less you seem to believe that we are doing it.”
“I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just; that his justice cannot sleep forever,” wrote Thomas Jefferson. There can be no acquiescence, no half-hearted or weak-kneed compromise. Not from a country that liberated Auschwitz and declared, with the rest of the civilized world, “Never again.”
Published in Domestic Policy, General
RightAngles, there is no way for Republicans to dodge the debate, even if being silent somehow improved their chances of limiting abortions. Democrats and liberal journalists will raise the issue so that they can misrepresent and demonize Republicans. The only pragmatic question is how best to respond.
RightAngles: #22 “BUT if the Republicans don’t leave the abortion issue alone, they will lose the White House. I don’t care how many Conservative women voice Pro-Life sentiments, believe me when I tell you every unmarried woman’s biggest nightmare is an unwanted pregnancy, and every mother’s is an unwanted pregnancy for her teenaged daughter. If you are a candidate promising to end abortion on demand, you will lose.
Just leave it alone, do not have it as a plank in the party, do not mention women’s health care, their sex lives, their uteruses (uteri?), or any other aspect of it. Please, Republicans, ask yourselves if you’d rather make a Moral Statement or win back the White House. You can’t do both, not this time around. Let’s talk about National Security and fiscal responsibility instead. You can defund Planned Parenthood when we have the White House back.”
Once the Pro-Life Plank departs from the Republican Party plank, you might assume that a lot of pro-life Republicans and conservatives will depart with it. If the Republicans lose 20- to 30-percent of their base, how many elections do you believe they’ll win? At that point you won’t be able to tell the difference between a Republican and a member of that other party of death.
Watching these videos, Dave, is much like watching horror movies — the hair on the back of my neck lifts and the feeling of doom descends on my mind. I feel physically ill every time I deal with this subject. Thank God the Center for Medical Progress is doing this work. It must really take strong individuals to do it and I pray for them that God may give them strength to carry this out to the bitter end. We are living in a Bizzaro World — truly.
How do such things happen? How do these people at Planned Parenthood deal with these videos now and what is it like to read what is being said about them? It is very hard to feel any sympathy for them — yet, we must try, while still remembering that the higher priority is not their feelings but the children that they are killing. So, there is a relentlessness to this latest fight against evil.
The people involved in the Center for Medical Progress have to wade into this cesspool and damage their minds and lose sleep in order to defeat this evil in our midst. How will they rid their minds and memories of the smell of the ovens of this new holocaust?
And why does the management of Ricochet provide contributor status to shills for Planned Parenthood?
Yes. Abortion rates have been decreasing since the peak in 1981. Yet still as of 2011, 21% of all pregnancies (excluding miscarriages) end in abortion.
I suggest there is another parallel between then and now. Mengle delivering the child only to hurl it into an oven, only differs from present partial birth abortions in the method of killing the child. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g46hlT_2804
What? Who?
Why, the contribtor who shills for Planned Parenthood, of course.
Why should this information be kept secret? Is reporting a fact a violation of the Coc?
Sometimes.
There are other methods of dealing with pregnancy like adoption. Also, tell those women who worry about pregnancy that abortion categorically increases the chance of a woman having breast cancer; breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in America for women so I think selling to personal costs is easy.
Also the conservative message is complete and whole, not some compromised half way this and half way that package. As Alexander Hamilton once said, in war moderation is suicide. Conservatives need to know their positions inside and out and argue for them, if need be even explaining the smallest details or the facts of the issue. The conservative message isn’t perfect, but it sure as hell is the best there is and it does more to benefit humanity in every facet than the left does.
I don’t see that anyone has commented on your title. The harvest of shame is because of what we have sowed. As the good book states, whatever a man sows, this he will also reap.
Mollie has another post up at theFederalist.
This one is about a new injunction filed against the Center for Medical Progress to prohibit release of any videos, pictures or information that they may have obtained at any National Abortion Federation meeting. It was signed a couple of hours after it was filed by an Obama donor/bundler.
http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/31/obama-appointee-blocks-more-video-releases-by-group-behind-planned-parenthood-sting/
No, I’m not saying that. And forget the polls because the Dems have most of the low-information voters, which unfortunately is probably the majority of Americans, believing that any Republican president will outlaw all abortions. And every time Rick Santorum or Mike Huckabee open their mouths, they give credence to it. I say leave it ALONE. And it doesn’t mean I’m pro-abortion because I’m not. I just want the GOP to live in the real world.
St. Pope John Paul II helps to explain how we got into this mess:
If you liked that, you can read more here.
St. Alphonsus Liguori, ora pro nobis.
Thank you for this, Dave. Back on 22 July, I posted a brief piece regarding Pravda-on-the-Hudson‘s treatment of the Planned Parenthood videos, in which I referred to abortion as the murdering of babies.
When one of our fellow contributors added a comment praising Pravda for preferring clinical language and accused me of resorting to “feverish” language, I took his comment to be satire and suggested that the clinical language (“fetal tissue”) preferred by Pravda was language worthy of Dr. Josef Mengele — only to discover that he thought that calling things by their proper names was dirty pool.
The name of the game for those who call murder “choice” is to silence those of us who have the effrontery to notice and say out loud that the emperor has no clothes. The Planned Parenthood videos lift the curtain and allow those willing to look to see what it is that we as a nation have sanctioned now for forty-two years.
Bravo for your bluntness!
I share your inclination to leave the gentleman’s name out. I do so in the hope that sticking to arguments and avoiding personalities might give the man the space he needs to think through what he is embracing. I do hope that he reads Dave’s post. It is only by averting our gaze — which Dave makes impossible — that we can continue to tolerate what we have sanctioned now for forty-two years.
The people whom you have known personally are not necessarily representative of most people. Pro-lifers do research on what kinds of ads work, and which ones don’t, and who they work on. A well produced ad will move many voters in a pro-life direction. Believe it or not, white men are the problem group: women are actually more likely to reconsider their position on abortion due to an ad than white men are.
I personally know many people who are basically pro-life liberals. They vote democrat partly because they don’t believe that republican higher ups are serious about ending abortion. I wish that I could tell them with certainty that they are wrong.
To this excellent list can be added the right to choose whether or not to purchase contraceptives.
Mr. Boomerang here.
There were 50,189,209 Americans in 1880, according to the 1880 US census records.
In1880, Rutherford B. Hayes was the US president.
New York city passed the 1 million mark in population.
Thomas Edison filed a patent for the electric light bulb.
A gun fight happened at the OK corral.
If every American in the US in 1880 had been killed it would have been fewer Americans than have been aborted since Roe v Wade became law in 1973.
It’s to protect the public’s right not to know.
It’s also because they actually think that the videos that are already out there are not enough to convince people. It’s accumulative, evidently, and they need to staunch the blood (so to speak).
Even one of the present videos should be enough to stop this murder. Mother Theresa used to say, “Don’t commit murder in your own body!”
I hope this comment isn’t too far from the main thrust of the thread, but a thought has been bothering me: Liberals are apoplectic about what global warming is going to do to future people, i.e., those who will be alive 100 years from now. But these same liberals don’t seem to care whether these very same future people are allowed to be born or are killed before they get that chance. If they are so concerned about the mass of hypothetical future people, why aren’t they just as concerned for identifiable individual future people?
Is there any speculation as to why the judge’s injunction didn’t block any lunch counter sit-ins on the topic?
If Republicans leave this issue alone, wouldn’t that destroy voters’ confidence in their willingness to support a social safety net for other unwanted, expensive, or inconvenient persons in our society?
You paint with a terribly broad brush. Not all single women in their 20s will move heaven and earth to terminate their pregnancy. Our son’s birthmother had been teenage, single and pregnant three times, gave birth to all three and is raising them as a single mother, after a brief time of being married to the childrens’ father. When married and pregnant with our son (number 4), the birth father said she should get an abortion. She said she could not do that and she made an adoption plan. Anecdotal, sure, but every one of that child’s body parts…another boy…is intact, alive and thriving. He is our greatest blessing, courtesy of a very corageous and strong young woman.
There are plenty of wealthy women on Chicago’s North Shore who think like you do…avoid abortion with a 10 foot pole. Well, if that’s your view, that’s complicity.
Claire Berlinski, Ed.
“For those who just need some ray of hope in this, don’t forget that abortion rates are now the lowest in the US since Roe v. Wade. I tend not to trust any of their analysis about why this is so: My gut says it was the widespread introduction of ultrasound, and then the widespread sharing of those images — even more, now on social media.
It’s just so powerful: You look at it and what do you see? Argument over.”
True, but there may be an additional explanation for this change of heart. In 2009 demographer Phillip Longman, a senior fellow at the liberal, Bill Gates-supported New America Foundation, wrote the essay, ‘The Return of Patriarchy,’ in Foreign Policy magazine (it is available online). In it he pointed out that feminist and counter-cultural women have very low birth rates, and that studies have shown that a parents’ politics influence their children more than their religion. If there have been 60 million abortions since 1973, presumably most were done to the offspring of pro-choice women. So, long story short, these 60 million could not be brought up to be pro-choice since they were aborted, and this may be a part of why there are fewer pro-choice people.
Paul, I appreciate your kind remarks. My apologies for the amount of time it has taken to respond, as it has been a busy afternoon and evening. The topic of this post is one on which euphemisms become self defeating. Those who think I’m being too blunt would do well to consider the blunt and brutal reality a live child experiences upon being torn limb from limb. My conscience will not allow me to discuss this any other way, and ignoring it would be, for me, collusion.
You are correct, of course. I asked for the person’s name without thinking about it, and of course it was wrong of me to do that. For many reasons, for all reasons, we who are pro-life must extend a message of love and forgiveness and redemption to anyone involved with abortion in any way. The op compares Planned Parenthood to the Nazis. I would recommend reading or re reading Victor Frankl’s book “Man’s Search for Meaning”. In that book, Dr. Frankl describes the conversion of a Nazi soldier-I think he was an SS officer, but I can’t remember. Before his conversion, he was the most cruel and sadistic man anyone had ever known; after his conversion, he became the saintliest man anyone had ever known, under very difficult circumstances: he became a prisoner himself.
I believe that the worst people have the potential to become the best people. Victor Frankl seemed to think so too.