National Organization of Women gags free speech

NOW Moves to Squelch Abortion Protest, Free Speech

    "Thugs", "terrorists", "mobsters", "extremists", "racketeers," are the words used in a campaign against a nationwide group of people. Is this invective directed at Mafia leaders by the U.S. Attorney in federal court? Not this time. It is the language of the National Organization for Women (NOW) as they continue their offensive against the Christian anti-abortion movement.

    NOW has filed suit in Federal Court in Chicago against two anti-abortion groups and three leading activists under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, a law originally intended to be used against drug cartels and organized crime syndicates. "We're going to prove a nationwide a, a network of violent activity that is centrally orchestrated and has the goal of closing down abortion clinics by illegal means including violence," said NOW President Patricia Ireland. "If the anti-abortion thugs won't obey the law, we'll go after them where it hurts -- their wallets," Ireland said at the start of court action March 4th.

    In January of 1994 the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that NOW could use the broad RICO statute to sue anti-abortion groups and individual activists, leading to the current civil suit against Operation Rescue and the Pro-Life Action League. Joseph Scheidler, Timothy Murphy and Andrew Scholberg, three of the league's top leaders, are also defendants in the case.

    NOW attorneys will not have to prove that the defendants participated in any criminal acts, only that they created an atmosphere that inspired others to commit crimes such as clinic arsons and bombings. "It's about force, violence and fear," NOW attorney Fay Clayton said.

    "This case is a nightmare for anybody who wants to picket," said G. Robert Blakey, the Notre Dame University law professor who was a chief author of the RICO statute. Blakely says RICO was only intended for use against organized crime and drug cartels.

    NOW is seeking a nationwide injunction and monetary damages to cover increased cost of security at clinics. If NOW wins the class-action lawsuit, other clinics could file claims triple the amount of damages which could run into the millions, potentially bankrupting anti-abortion activists and organizations. NOW could use court injunctions to suppress anti-abortion speech they perceive as inflammatory and a threat to their cause.

    Joseph Scheidler, one of the defendants in the case, said he advocates pursuing the anti-abortion cause "by legal means." He said that he is being blamed for the violence of a few individuals who acted alone. "They have to find a conspiracy. They have to find a capo, a kind of mastermind behind all of this, and they think it's me," Scheidler said. He added that the threat of injunction or bankruptcy will not stop the anti-abortion movement. "We'll still go out to the clinics. We'll still pray. We'll still do the things we're doing," he said. (1)

NOW's Totalitarian Slip is Showing

    If NOW wins the lawsuit against anti-abortion protesters, they will have successfully raised the stakes in the abortion controversy. The lawsuit is not aimed at clinic bombers or arsonists, but at those who exercise their first amendment right to peaceably assemble, organize and speak out against abortion. As feminist lawyers appeal to activist federal judges to squelch dissent and enforce the practice of abortion, protest will become more radicalized, creating an even fiercer culture war that will defeat the end that NOW professes to seek -- the protection of women's rights.

    NOW is a major legal arm of the feminist movement, influencing legislation and suing to promote the feminist agenda. Last year a federal judge certified NOW to represent all women in the U.S. whose right to use an abortion clinic had been impeded by anti-abortion protesters. This is the first time a court has certified a class in this kind of lawsuit. (2)

    Planned Parenthood is an arm of feminism that is dedicated to implementing "reproductive rights," also known as the population control agenda. NOW and Planned Parenthood are both branches of the same tree. For NOW's agenda in this latest suit to be seen in its proper light, one must consider the history of Planned Parenthood and its founder, Margaret Sanger.

Planned Parenthood's Nazi Past

    A few years ago Rush Limbaugh coined the word "femi-nazi" to describe the feminist movement today. It is unclear if he was mocking the destructive, fanatical fervor of modern feminism, or if he really understood the common roots that feminism and Hitler's Nazi party both share. Margaret Sanger, the founder and patron saint of Planned Parenthood, seemed to be more of a Nazi than Hitler was if you lay their writings side by side. Sanger's views on eugenics, race, abortion, euthanasia and the elimination of the unfit make Hitler's Mein Kampf sound moderate by comparison. Sanger and Hitler were contemporaries that shared the same goal of Aryan White Supremacy and both were deeply involved in theosophy and the occult.

    Margaret Sanger was an archradical and a revolutionary who gained notoriety in New York's wealthy socialist circles after the turn of the century. She started a newspaper called The Woman Rebel which bore the slogan, "No Gods and No Masters". She used it to spread her incendiary Bolshevik sentiments, promote contraception, abortion and "free love," the latter of which she practiced notoriously. She hated Christianity and capitalism and regarded the marriage bed as a form of bondage to be cast away.

    To avoid prison on obscenity charges, Margaret fled to England where she hobnobbed with Fabian socialists such as H.G. Wells and George Bernard Shaw. Other Fabian members of the New World Order gang helped shape her world view and, most of all, feed her fascination with Malthusian Eugenics.

    Margaret Sanger returned to the United States a year later. After getting her obscenity charges dropped, she founded the Birth Control League. She also began printing The Birth Control Review, a magazine which regularly featured racists and eugenicists. Contributor Lothrop Stoddard, who also served on Sanger's board of directors, wrote "The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy" where he claimed that, "We must resolutely oppose both Asiatic permeation of white race-areas and Asiatic inundation of those non-white, but equally non-Asiatic regions inhabited by the really inferior races." Sanger's magazine also made policy proposals, such as the creation of "moron communities," the forced production of children by the "fit," and the compulsory sterilization and even elimination of the "unfit." (3)

    In 1925 Margaret Sanger published The Pivot of Civilization in which she called for the "elimination of 'human weeds,' for the 'cessation of charity' because it prolonged the lives of the unfit, for the segregation of 'morons, misfits, and the maladjusted,' and for the sterilization of genetically inferior or dysgenic races." (4)

    In April of 1933 Sanger's paper printed "Eugenic Sterilization: an Urgent Need." This article was written by Ernst Rudin, her close friend and advisor who was also serving as the director of the Hitler's dreadful Medical Experimentation Program. She later published "Selective Sterilization", an article which praised the Third Reich's racial purification programs. In other articles she championed the euthanasia, sterilization, infanticide and abortion programs of the Third Reich.

    Sanger's disdain was not limited to "morons and misfits," but to the Black population as well. "The masses of Negroes ... particularly in the South, still breed carelessly and disastrously, with the result that in the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that portion of the population least intelligent and fit...." Her solution was "a religious appeal. We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members." (5)

    Margaret Sanger also wrote that the "ill-favored" and "dysgenic" races also included "Fundamentalists and Catholics" in addition to "Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians." (6) "Birth control ... is calculated to undermine the authority of the Christian churches," she wrote in her first paper, "The Woman Rebel." "I look forward to seeing humanity free someday of the tyranny of Christianity no less than Capitalism." (7)

    Of course, all "dysgenic" races would be eliminated, either through coerced sterilization, abortion, starvation or whatever means available. Because of her connections in Malthusian and eugenics circles, she became closely associated with the scientists and theorists who developed Germany's "race purification" program. It is without a doubt that her ideas and influence contributed to the Nazi policy of extermination to be carried out in Germany a few years later.

    It was the ghastly reports coming out of Germany that convinced Margaret Sanger to change the name of her organization to Planned Parenthood. "Birth Control League" had coercive overtones and she needed a public relations makeover to counter the news of Nazi atrocities.

"Proud of our Past, and Planning for our Future"

    Margaret Sanger never changed her views on eugenics or repudiated her connections with the Nazi death machine. She merely added a patina of refinement to her organization, promoting feminist causes and soliciting and receiving grants from various philanthropies and trusts including the Rockefellers, the Fords and the Mellons. The sixties brought her acceptance and fame. She increased in popularity, and her organization received tax-exempt status as it increased in size and wealth. She lobbied for laws allowing contraceptives and the eventual legalization of abortion in the U.S. Planned Parenthood is now taxpayer funded and active in promoting Margaret's sexual values in the public schools.

    Adolph Hitler said in a 1939 speech, "Let us spend our efforts and our resources on the productive, not on the wastrel." In another place he exhorted, "Rid the earth of dysgenic peoples by whatever means available so that we may enjoy the prosperity of the fatherland." (8) Hitler's policies, and even his use of Margaret's trademark word "dysgenic," provoke the question: "was Hitler merely following the policies of Margaret Sanger and her organization, Planned Parenthood?"

    We may see a second parallel in Soviet Russia where Stalin, whose blood-letting was only rivaled by Hitler's, once said, "The greatest obstacle to the successful completion of the people's revolution is the swarming of inferior races from the south and east... [and] the foolhardy interference of church charity." (9). The policy makers that inspired Stalin's bloody purges against various ethnic groups and the politically incorrect are worthy of further investigation.

    Official history today leads us to abhor Hitler and Stalin, and at least some of their crimes are chronicled for our edification. There is an element that remains relatively unexposed, however, and its continued concealment is reason to suspect that it was the major player in the extermination campaigns of the 30's and 40's, with Stalin and Hitler merely carrying out a complex agenda that was beyond their personal level of sophistication. With this in mind, we may soberly reflect on the Planned Parenthood 1985 annual report which contained the statement: "Proud of our past, and planning for our future." (10)

    We are told that Margaret Sanger didn't change her ways. Even in her old age, addicted as she was to drugs and alcohol, she continued her sordid affairs. She taught her sixteen-year-old granddaughter that kissing, petting and sexual intercourse were all right as long as she was "sincere" and that having sex "three times a day" was "just about right." (11). In her book The Woman and the New Race she wrote, "The most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it." (12). This was Margaret Sanger till the day she died and beneath its "progressive" exterior, this is Planned Parenthood today.

    Adolph Hitler and Margaret Sanger are gone, but their deadly policies of genocide continue to live in the "respectable" institutions of feminism and Planned Parenthood. The correlation between feminism and Nazi Germany may seem ludicrous, but that is only because the smooth Orwellian newspeak of today's social engineers has replaced the usages of the 20's and 30's. The glaring horrors of the death camps are replaced by the sterile medical environment and the killing is done in the darkness of the womb.

    Powerful occult forces are sweeping humanity into self-annihilation. The killing of the unborn has opened the door for more extermination under the pretense of "rights" or "compassion". There will always be more classes of human beings who are less than perfect or, just simply, in the way. Assisted suicide and euthanasia are harbingers of a greater "weeding out" of the weak, unproductive and politically incorrect. With our mind's eye we may already make out the piles of bodies and the smoke of the crematorium. History is coming full circle once again.

    NOW's rabid attacks against Christian anti-abortion activists echoes Margaret Sanger's hatred of Christianity and Hitler's persecution of the Christian minority who opposed his policies. The fact that this demonic fury has harnessed the power of the federal government, portends some ominous developments just ahead.

 

FOOTNOTES:

(1) CNN - NOW SUES ANTI-ABORTION ACTIVISTS UNDER RACKETEERING LAW. March 4, 1998.
(2) NOW Press Release, March 4 - OPENING ARGUMENTS BEGIN IN NOW v. SCHEIDLER.
(3) "The Repackaging of Margaret Sanger," Steven W. Mosher, Wall Street Journal, May 5, 1997.
(4) Killer Angel, George Grant, Reformer Press: p.73.
(5) ibid. p. 73,74
(6) ibid. p. 73
(7) ibid. p. 104
(8) ibid. p. 85
(9) ibid. p. 85
(10) ibid. p. 105
(11) ibid. p. 103
(12) ibid. p. 103

Additional source material: The Population Control Agenda by Stanely K. Monteith, M.D.

Written 3/12/98

 

The WINDS Main Page

Disclaimer: APFN is not responsible for the accuracy of material on 'The Winds'
and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within their web pages.

This page is in the public domain.

Go to Top