Abortion is black genocide? Nonsense, of course

WASHINGTON — Johnny Hunter, a black preacher who opposes abortion rights, came here last week to join a protest against federal funds for Planned Parenthood. He stood behind a sign that read: “Planned Parenthood has killed more African-Americans than the KKK.”

Hunter is among Roe v. Wade’s diehard opponents, single-minded activists for whom nothing is more important than repealing a woman’s right to choose. While other voters worry about jobs, health insurance and college loans, Hunter and like-minded reactionaries focus on reproductive rights.

They have support in Congress, too. Last week’s budget negotiations were prolonged by a cadre of Republicans who tried to wipe out all federal funding for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which they wrongly claim is mostly in the business of providing abortions.

They lost that battle, but they never give up. (They won restrictions on abortions in Washington, D.C.) Tireless opponents of reproductive rights are already planning their next assault.

The use of race as a wedge is the latest tactic for those reactionaries, who see an opportunity to cultivate support among black Americans, especially church-goers with a conservative streak on social issues. While anti-abortionists have long derided Margaret Sanger, considered the mother of modern family planning, for her support of eugenics, their campaign to portray Planned Parenthood as a hotbed of bigots is a more recent development. Hunter, an enthusiastic purveyor of wrongheaded conspiracy theories (he says President Obama is “an Arab”), insisted that famed family planning advocate Margaret Sanger started her birth control campaign in order “to wipe out the black race.”

Hunter and his followers have hoisted their flag on a data point they believe points to their hidden truth: the abortion rate for black American women is almost five times that for white women, according to the Alan Guttmacher Institute, a non-profit that advocates for reproductive health.  About 37 percent of abortions are obtained by black women, although they account for less than seven percent of the population.

A conspiracy? Genocide? A secret plan hiding in plain sight?

Hardly. The higher abortion rate among black women is a logical — if desperate — answer to an unplanned pregnancy and meager resources. Since black women tend to be poorer than white women, they are less likely to have the benefit of regular health care and the contraceptive information and services it confers. Trapped in meager circumstances, many black women who find themselves facing an unplanned pregnancy choose abortion.

Oddly, the most vociferous critics of Planned Parenthood are also the least likely to support plans and proposals that might actually lower the abortion rate — among black women as well as among white and brown women. Take contraceptive use, which (you might be surprised to know) Planned Parenthood vigorously supports. Contraception accounts for about 35 percent of its services; abortion only about three percent.

If birth control pills and devices were cheaper and more widely available, more women would use them. Unplanned pregnancies would drop. The abortion rate would decline. But conservatives like Hunter have no use for family planning, period.

And what if more poor black women chose not to terminate their pregnancies? What if more desperate women without health insurance or decent housing or reliable employment decided to rely on the tender mercies of the social safety net for their newborns? Would they find conservatives in Congress rushing to shore up funding for housing assistance, food subsidies and health care for the indigent?

Well, this is where things get really strange: the more vociferous a critic of reproductive rights, the less likely the politician is to support Head Start or Medicaid or WIC, which provides milk and other nutritional assistance to poor pregnant women. They love those fetuses in utero. After that, not so much.

It’s a strange love, to say the least.

216 comments Add your comment

willie lynch

April 13th, 2011
12:57 pm

“It’s a strange love, to say the least.”

But very consistent with madness.

Jethro

April 13th, 2011
1:02 pm

Why do men think they have a right to tell women what to do with their bodies? Why do they think they have the right to use the police power of state to enforce their morality? They are no different than jihadists.

Guy Incognito

April 13th, 2011
1:05 pm

“It’s a strange love, to say the least.”

Just like libs’ love of free speech………as long as all the speech conforms to their views

Kamchak

April 13th, 2011
1:06 pm

Last week’s budget negotiations were prolonged by a cadre of Republicans who tried to wipe out all federal funding for the Planned Parenthood Federation of America, which they wrongly claim is mostly in the business of providing abortions.

But…but…but…Jon Kyle said that more than 90 percent of Planned Parenthood’s business is providing abortions.

Of course is office later claimed his remarks were not meant as a “factual statement.”

Hootinanny Yum Yum

April 13th, 2011
1:06 pm

I am a proponent of abortion rights.

If a woman wants to terminate a pregnancy, go for it.

If that same woman is on government support of any kind, has children she cannot afford to feed, or has children from multiple partners; she should also have her tubes tied.

End of story.

Hootinanny Yum Yum

April 13th, 2011
1:09 pm

Jethro writes: “Why do men think they have a right to tell women what to do with their bodies? Why do they think they have the right to use the police power of state to enforce their morality? They are no different than jihadists.”

Well. Maybe for the same reasons that some think they have the right to use the police power of state to enforce the redistribution of wealth.

Peadawg

April 13th, 2011
1:09 pm

Jethro, what do you say to women who are against murder (or abortion for the pc crowd)?

Jack

April 13th, 2011
1:12 pm

Unplanned pregnacies can easily be avoided. No need to mention the obvious here.

Lake Burton

April 13th, 2011
1:22 pm

Let them keep getting abortions. The more abortions they get, the fewer of them we have to take care of the rest of their lives.

guy

April 13th, 2011
1:22 pm

You can never change the mindset of uneducated people.They will not use birth control,etc.,especially as long as the government keeps them up on welfare and food stamps.It’s a terrible cycle that will only get worse and it’s not just black women I’m referring to.
It’s sad where this country has been heading the last 45 years and is now steamrolling to self destruction.
It’s called “The Great Society”!!!!

Jethro

April 13th, 2011
1:23 pm

I say that those women have the right to do with their bodies as they will. I think that if the police power of the state denies a woman the right to control her reproductive organs, that same power ought to be used to provide mandatory vasectomies on men who impregnate women out of wedlock.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

April 13th, 2011
1:24 pm

At least the anti-abortionists would make slightly more sense if their agenda included the birth control and care for the children who were born but then again, its not really about caring for the reality behind the statistic, its all about using the statistic of higher abortion rate for black women as a faux reason for their overall agenda.

And Pea, murder is a legal definition. Abortion is legal, not murder. But then again you aren’t really discussing a faux-PC concern, your trying to make a false association. And coming in 3 … 2… 1….”Who me?”

carlosgvv

April 13th, 2011
1:30 pm

Anti-abortion groups are determined to reverse Roe vs Wade at all costs. When asked why, they usually site Christian religious convictions. When it is pointed out to them that the New Testament does NOT even mention abortion, they say “thou shall not kill”. When then asked about police killing in the line of duty, soldiers killing in war and the death penality they go into spasms of mental gymnastics that make sense only to them. They cannot be reasoned with, so don’t bother.

Blue

April 13th, 2011
1:30 pm

“less likely to have the benefit of regular health care and the contraceptive information and services it confers.” Do you really, really believe the tripe you write? EVERY poor person I know knows about contraceptive and about ALL of them could choose a condom (I know…not fool proof). Typical left wing play book. HEY…by the way…when are you going to pull out the race card on the article today in AJC about prison recitavism? And about how black men commit WAY more crimes than what their % of the population is…but somehow, it will be whitey’s fault?

Good Grief

April 13th, 2011
1:31 pm

You’ll never stop abortions. Even if you remove any hint of federal or state funding for them, the practice will go underground and become less safe than it already is. One avenue of thought on this topic is the double standard that exists. If a woman wants to get an abortion, a lot of people are okay with that. Her body, her choice. If, whhile on her way to the abortion clinic, a drunk driver were to run over said woman and kill her, the drunk driver could potentially be charged with two counts of vehicular manslaughter or worse. It’s seemingly okay for one person to kill the child, but not for another. That’s been my gripe with the abortion debate for a long time.

Blue

April 13th, 2011
1:31 pm

“reproductive rights” to you is “right to live” to others. But how dare anyone have a different opinion than you.

Blue

April 13th, 2011
1:33 pm

Kamchak; don’t confuse her with facts. Good grief; the issue here is not stopping abortion but not having federal money to pay for it.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

April 13th, 2011
1:38 pm

Really Blue? Just how much federal money is used to pay for abortions currently? Please provide a link. Thanks.

Blue

April 13th, 2011
1:38 pm

Jethro

April 13th, 2011
1:23 pm
I say that those women have the right to do with their bodies as they will. I think that if the police power of the state denies a woman the right to control her reproductive organs, that same power ought to be used to provide mandatory vasectomies on men who impregnate women out of wedlock.

Try to stay with me; they are NOT denying what she chooses to do with her reproductive organs; this is about taxpayer money being used to terminate pregnancies. Understand the difference? It’s that old “liberal bugaboo”; taking responsibilities for your personal choices. You choose to not use birth control or abstain, then YOU pay for your ‘choice’, not rely on everyone else’s money. CT’s argument is tired; “they don’t knows no better cuz dey poor; den dey don’t have no moneys to do it theyselves…so they need the guhmint to do it”.

TBone

April 13th, 2011
1:38 pm

We’ve spanned the social horizons by taking this destructive behavior from a racial to cultural and socioeconomic concern. I think the good pastor is the only consistent one here. You can make arguments all day long about the number of abortions in any population; but the bottom line is that any abortion is wrong. Justify it as you might but it is still wrong.

Blue

April 13th, 2011
1:40 pm

Keep; I made NO reference to what is being done CURRENTLY as far as government funds, so no…I will NOT provide you a link for something I did not reference and is not ‘on point’. Her article is about “protest against federal funds for Planned Parenthood”. I’m talking about that…but nice try on the ‘deflecting’.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

April 13th, 2011
1:41 pm

Blue: CT’s argument is tired; “they don’t knows no better cuz dey poor; den dey don’t have no moneys to do it theyselves…so they need the guhmint to do it

I’ve heard Ms Tucker speak and that is not her. So just what are you suggesting with your dialect selection?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

April 13th, 2011
1:42 pm

Blue: the issue here is not stopping abortion but not having federal money to pay for it

Blue: Keep; I made NO reference to what is being done CURRENTLY as far as government funds

So which is the lie you’ve told?

iRun

April 13th, 2011
1:43 pm

Jon Kyl has a vanishing twin.

#NotIntendedToBeAFactualStatement

Gm

April 13th, 2011
1:44 pm

Keep Up the Good Fight!: Typical idiot hick remark from Georgia: Compare her talking to air head Sara Palin”"”

Madison

April 13th, 2011
1:48 pm

This article should be about people learning to be responsible not about the cost or lack of education around birth control …..please…..why make this a class or color of the skin issue. If you don’t want to become pregnant ….than take the necessary steps to avoid this as being an option…..lack of education isn’t an excuse….and either way as a taxpayer I shouldn’t be responsible for paying for your excuses.

iRun

April 13th, 2011
1:51 pm

The real reason THOSE PEOPLE are (1) against abortion, (2) against family planning that doesn’t include abortion, (3) and against providing for the welfare of poor children is because they want to create a permanent underclass in our society to use as a tool to gain power for themselves. How? Just look around you at the current debates. Besides this underclass, who loses the MOST? The middle class. They distract us with these little arguments of morality and exercises in fear posturing while stealing our tax dollars.

Privatize the profits. Publicize the risk. And make sure the middle class never notices.

Gerald

April 13th, 2011
1:52 pm

carlosgvv:

“Thou shalt not kill” means, literally and in context, “do not commit murder.” It was translated “kill”, but the Hebrew word, ratsach, means “murder” and specifically “premeditated murder.” The same is true of phoneuō, the Greek word used in the New Testament. As a matter of fact, the newer translations do have “do not murder” as opposed to the old “thou shalt not kill.” Now while the context was obvious in the Old Testament and the newer renderings were never necessary to begin with, the new translations do widely exist and can easily be used to correct persons such as yourself. So, a policeman in the line of duty does not commit murder, and (while I do generally have anti-war tendencies) neither does a soldier on a battlefield.

And to think that folks like you accuse Christians of being poorly educated and ill informed. You don’t even need a Theology 101 course or cursory knowledge of Greek or Hebrew, but rather access to a newer Bible translation. Did you bother to get one before spouting your untruths? Of course not. Typical arrogant liberal who doesn’t know nearly as much as he presumes himself to …

iRun

April 13th, 2011
1:53 pm

Madison, it’s not lack of education but lack of dollars. Many poor women cannot afford birth control.

And sure, you may argue condoms but many poor women aren’t in a position to negotiate the terms of sex with their partners, due to economic disadvantage and/or violence. This isn’t often talked about but it’s pretty common in poor women.

David

April 13th, 2011
2:00 pm

“Well, this is where things get really strange: the more vociferous a critic of reproductive rights, the less likely the politician is to support Head Start or Medicaid or WIC, which provides milk and other nutritional assistance to poor pregnant women. They love those fetuses in utero. After that, not so much.” In other words, these social ultraconservatives are saying, “We’ll get you here, kid, but after that you’re on your own.”

DawgDad

April 13th, 2011
2:00 pm

Cynthia, you attack opponents of Federal spending on abortion as having a “strange kind of love” for the unborn. But YOU yourself have no love. YOU want to ensure the Fed takes (by force) MY money to pay for SOMEONE ELSE’s abortion. YOU are advocating using the Fed to impose your sick religious belief system onto the backs of honest taxpayers, many of whom consider abortion to be murder.

You are not standing on a street corner honestly urging people to contribute; you are advocating confiscation of our resources for an immoral purpose. Shame on you.

Julie R Camp

April 13th, 2011
2:01 pm

Here’s a novel idea. Take birthcontrol and use a condom. Thus you avoid pregnancy and STD’s. WOW! Women’s health should be first and foremost with the woman herself!!!!!

Keep Up the Good Fight!

April 13th, 2011
2:01 pm

The LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon…. And there was a great cry in Egypt; for there was not a house where there was not one dead. — Exodus 12:29-30

Smoting is ok, but not abortion? But then typical arrogant Christian who doesn’t know nearly as much as he presumes himself to…..

Julie R Camp

April 13th, 2011
2:02 pm

Or, if you’re poor, keep you legs closed……that’s a great idea.

JB

April 13th, 2011
2:02 pm

If you knew God….You wouldn’t have to ask or write this. Accept the will and laws of this world made by man and ignore God and accept your fate. God would never allow this. Never. Hire your best lawyer to argue with God. You lose. It’s wrong.

iRun

April 13th, 2011
2:02 pm

BTW – federal funds are not used by Planned Parenthood for abortion services. ZERO.

So, now…what IS your argument???

Julie R Camp

April 13th, 2011
2:03 pm

God gives and only God can take away.

jocko

April 13th, 2011
2:03 pm

Why not use a more civilized way to defend your support of Planned Parenthood (PPA). I agree that abortion is only 3% of the total menu of services that PPA provides. But…what percentage of the money they receive from Uncle Sam do they spend performing this “service”? The cost of performing abortions far exceeds that which is spent on adoption, education, cancer screening (pap smears and breast exams), and STD treatment. Abortions are dangerous and very expensive.
Reid, Pelosi and Obama have all said that it is illegal to use Federal Funds for abortion.
So, let’s have an audit done of PPA finances. Then break off what is for women’s health and use Federal Funds to assist in those programs. A privately funded charity could then provide funds need to help those who couldn’t afford and abortion on their own. Abortion is legal but most voters oppose using Federal Funds to provide for it and yes, it will always be legal here.
One last item, in 2008 PPA performed 375,000 abortions and only 2400+ adoptions, in 2009 PPA performed 330,000+ abortions and didn’t list how many adoptions were finalized for that year. 705.000 abortions performed in just 2 years and 37% (you mentioned that in your article) of those were done on women of color? Come on Cynthia!!!

iRun

April 13th, 2011
2:04 pm

One last time…Planned Parenthood does not use ANY tax dollars to provide abortion services. None. Nada. Zero.

Litt

April 13th, 2011
2:05 pm

Cynthia again perpetuates the myth of the outrageous cost of contraceptives.

The cost of a 90 day supply of ortho-tricyclen at Walmart is $10.00 or for the mathematically challenged liberals among us, approximately $3.33 per month.

That’s less per month than the cost of – a pack of smokes or a Big Mac meal or a bag of Doritos.

Gerald

April 13th, 2011
2:06 pm

Incidentally, thanks to abortion rates in the black community, the black population growth has been basically stagnant for the last two decades. The reason for this isn’t poverty, because all demographers know that poverty and education generally increases child bearing rates – women who are poor and less educated have more children – while child bearing rates go down with increased wealth and education. Look at the last two census results. Where the black percentage of the population had steadily increased until it reached a high of over 13%, nearly 13.5%, in the 1990 census, it was at a standstill in the 2000 census, and in the 2010 census it dropped and is now well under 13%, at 12.7%. This results in less black political clout and fewer blacks holding office, which USED to be a major concern of the black leadership. Now, blacks aren’t even the #1 minority, Hispanics are. And guess what: HISPANIC WOMEN GET FAR FEWER ABORTIONS DESPITE MANY OF THEM BEING POORER THAN BLACK WOMEN!

Now the decline of the black population – and political clout with it – has long been known to black leaders and intellectuals. But instead of attributing it to abortion and in the process running afoul of white feminists (who hold the real power in the Democratic Party and on the left, and if any of you remember the PUMA movement a few years back, many of them don’t think much of blacks, especially the males!) the black leadership came up with the “blacks are being undercounted” nonsense and sham policies like “sampling.” There was never this problem with “undercounts” or a need for “sampling” before abortion became popular in the black community, so why now?

Oh yeah. Ms. Tucker is ignoring the FACT that abortion clinics JUST HAPPEN TO BE disproportionately located in or near black neighborhoods. Gee, wonder why that is? Just going where there is a demand? And nothing wrong with that; it’s the free market? Wow, well it looks like when it comes to abortion, Cynthia Tucker morphs from being an economic progressive to a free market supply side capitalist libertarian! So, have you sent your campaign donation to Rand Paul yet, Ms. Tucker? (Then again, as Paul is pro-life, I guess you haven’t).

Jesse Jackson was once pro-life, and attributed abortion to racism. Jackson in the 1970s predicted that abortion on demand would result in precisely this: black women heavily disproportionately receiving abortions. Jackson only switched sides when he left his radical roots and joined the Democratic Party; when he chose his own political career over the interests of the black race. (And to think that Clarence Thomas is considered to be a sell-out?) The other black leaders followed him, and ironically, opening the door of the black community to abortion is reducing the black population and their own political clout with it!

So, enjoy the Obama administration fellas! (By the way, did you know that the only actual work that Obama did as editor of the Harvard Law Review was to write a piece in support of abortion on the demand? Curious!) Because due to the declining black political clout that as a result of the declining black population, he is going to be the last! And if these abortion rates in the black community continue, Atlanta will soon have a white mayor just like Baltimore does. Thanks to abortion on demand, Atlanta will be a “chocolate city” no more! Doesn’t it make you proud! Only if you are a KKK segger …

jocko

April 13th, 2011
2:06 pm

IRun,
That’s not true and you know it. Prove it.

El Jefe

April 13th, 2011
2:06 pm

Frankly, I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.
Ruth Bader Ginsburg

JB

April 13th, 2011
2:07 pm

It’s wrong not because of the leg spreader’s choice, it’s wrong because the little one in the womb with a heartbeat HAS NO SAY IN THE MATTER ! It’s murder. Killing a helpless human is murder.

iRun

April 13th, 2011
2:10 pm

The abortion services provided by Planned Parenthood, you know, that make up more than 90% of their services (ref: Kyl), are SELF-SUPPORTED. They are not paid for using tax dollars.

I can’t provide a link because they don’t allow them but Google “putnam county right to life Abortion Becomes Flashpoint in Shutdown Battle” to get a Right to Life website that mentions this FACT about tax dollars and PPA.

J coner

April 13th, 2011
2:10 pm

“If birth control pills and devices were cheaper and more widely available, more women would use them. Unplanned pregnancies would drop.”

Uh huh…sure they would. I’m sure all these po little girls are saying “if only birth control pills and devices were cheaper I’d use them.” Of course what CT meant by cheaper is “free”

iRun

April 13th, 2011
2:11 pm

jocko – which thing I said is not true. I addressed at least 3 different points.

J coner

April 13th, 2011
2:11 pm

IRun….If Planned Parenthood doesn’t use tax funds for abortions, then what is Washington DC so concerned about?

Gerald

April 13th, 2011
2:12 pm

Keep Up the Good Fight!:

So, your argument is that God does not have – or should not have – prerogatives that man cannot enjoy? Excuse me, but what is the basis of this argument? That God is a man, with the same power and knowledge of a man, and should act accordingly? Of course, if you are an atheist, the whole exercise is academic anyway. But from the perspective of a person who believes the Bible – or at least takes it seriously – is hogwash. The Bible takes the perspective, the presumption if you will, that God has the right to kill – because He is God – and also has the right to tell man that it is wrong to commit murder – because being God, He owns and rules mankind unconditionally. Again, even if you are an atheist, you would have to concede that SUCH IS THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE BIBLE. So, any arguments that “thou shalt not kill” with respect to abortion is hypocritical or inconsistent based on it is foolishness.

My goodness, is this what liberal scholarship is producing these days? Leon Trotsky would be so ashamed of your ilk …

iRun

April 13th, 2011
2:13 pm

The leg spreader? OK, since the hole poker can’t also be the bun cooker then I guess it’s the leg spreader’s rights that matter.

Or, do you just mean “Women who have sex are dirty”?