- The Washington Times - Thursday, July 17, 2008

Other ‘planning’

“There’s no eugenicist like an old eugenicist. In a jaw-droppingly blunt 1957 television interview conducted by Mike Wallace, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger shows that she was still the same woman who, in 1932, urged Congress to set up a Parliament of Population ‘to give certain dysgenic groups in our population their choice of segregation or sterilization.’

“The interview is available online in its entirety, as is a transcript. Wallace does an admirable job confronting Sanger with her own pronouncements, including her having told his own researcher that ‘it should be made illegal for any religious group to prohibit dissemination of birth control - even among its own members.’ Not for nothing is she Barack Obama’s heroine.”

- Dawn Eden, writing on “Margaret Sanger tells Mike Wallace of the ‘greatest sin,’” on July 8 at the Dawn Patrol

Mirror images

“So read the Newsweek cover that drew my attention this morning at the office … ‘Who matters more?’ Darwin vs. Lincoln? They were both born on February 19, 1809, so the bicentennial is coming up. The article gives the nod to Lincoln, who waged a war ‘to ensure that no man shall have dominion over another.’

“Nice try, but it seems to me the issue of treating other human beings as property is still with us, witness abortion, infanticide, sexual slavery (about which little is written and less is done), the sale of body parts, cloning for parts, and so on. Darwin, the article says, advanced ‘the idea that we are not over nature but a part of it.’

“Since it is a nature ‘red in tooth and claw,’ the issues I just mentioned shouldn’t matter, unless we are not only a part of nature but over it as well, having some moral responsibility that is Given, not just up to whatever our feelings and passions are at the moment. Right now, Darwin wins, and we very much need a Lincoln to remind us of our better natures.”

- James M. Kushiner, writing on “Lincoln vs. Darwin,” on July 7 at the Touchstone blog Mere Comments

Religious freedom

“Two weeks before the Texas Supreme Court unanimously rejected the wholesale removal of children from the Yearning for Zion Ranch in Eldorado, a spokesman for the state’s Child Protective Services (CPS) insisted the case ‘is not about religion.’ If you believe that, you may also believe that a community of hundreds is a single household, or that a 27-year-old is younger than 18, to cite just a couple of the whoppers CPS has told about the largest child custody case in U.S. history.

“To justify seizing 468 children from the ranch, which is owned by the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (FLDS), CPS argued that the church’s teachings are inherently abusive. CPS did not bother to present evidence that particular children were in immediate physical danger, as required by state law, because it thought membership in the polygamous sect was enough to make parents unfit.

“The state asserted that a ‘pervasive belief system’ at the ranch, which it raided on April 3 in response to what seems to have been a fictitious abuse report, encouraged underage marriage. ‘They’re living under an umbrella of belief that having children at a young age is a blessing,’ the lead investigator testified. ‘Therefore any child in that environment would not be safe.’”

- Jacob Sullum, writing on “No Child Left Behind,” in the August/September issue of Reason magazine

LOAD COMMENTS ()

 

Click to Read More

Click to Hide