Tacia Truss: Sanger’s Eugenic Ghost in RI’s Abortion Debate

As a lifelong resident of Rhode Island and mixed minority woman of faith, I can no longer keep my opposition to Planned Parenthood and the progressive health agenda silent.

Eugenics among minority populations was an original theme of Margaret Sanger’s promotion of abortion rights and her founding of Planned Parenthood in the early 1900s. Of course, today, any notion of seeking to control breeding by race is seen as a grossly unacceptable violation of core American values.

Yet, to Rhode Island Democrats, unfettered and unrestricted abortions are apparently more important than preventing race-based eugenics. As part of the March debate in the Rhode Island House of Representatives over legislation that would expand legal abortions and remove legal protections against the murder of an unborn baby, a Republican amendment designed to guard against genetic bigotry was curiously voted down by Democrats. The amendment would have disallowed a mother’s potential personal prejudices as a legitimate reason to satisfy the legislation’s purposefully vague definition of the mother’s “health” exception, including mental health, to justify the abortion of a viable baby in the womb.

The amendment sought to protect against four culturally repulsive check-boxes that could justify a late-term abortion: the genetic race, gender, sexual preference, or Down Syndrome traits of the fetus. In killing the amendment, Democrats expressed faux outrage that it was racist itself to imply that any woman would ever stoop to such lows. History, however tells a different story.

It is well documented that many cultures across the globe have euthanized babies because of their female genetics. Many European nations currently allow or encourage the abortion of babies with Down Syndrome. In America, Sanger herself suggested that abortions could be a useful tool in controlling African American populations. And, if the alleged homosexuality gene is ever discovered, might homophobia ever be used to justify abortions?

Further, no fewer than 10 U.S. states have passed legislation to ban abortions in the case of genetic prejudice, according to the Guttmacher Institute.

As an African American woman who checks two of these four boxes, I am outraged, as other minorities should be. I can imagine only one reason why Democrats defeated an amendment that would guard against fetal discrimination based on race, gender, sexual identification, or infirmity: pure hypocrisy.

After all, aren’t Democrat-leftists the ones who pretend to care so much about racial and gender injustice? Aren’t they the ones who scream racist labels at their opponents. But, with Margaret Sanger as their ultimate hero, when it came to backing a sensible amendment to protect against such bias, they folded like cheap tents, beholden to their Planned Parenthood masters and the concept of anytime, anywhere abortions for any reason.

What this travesty proves is that, to the progressive-left, there is no more sacred religion than women having the choice to kill their unborn babies. Racial, women’s, and LGBT rights be damned, if it competes with this choice. Progressive hypocrisy at its worst.

  • No products in the cart.