Click here to go back to where you came from

Do abortion promoters target minorities?

The African American Pro-Life Journal


American Life League presents to the reader an overview of exactly what our nation is doing to our minority population, born and preborn alike.

We are extremely proud to bring you these messages, which both lay out a problem and provide the solutions. No one who reads these essays will be able to sit on the sidelines any longer.

The battle is raging, and we must work together to save the future of our nation. Black, white, yellow or red--God creates each person in His own image and we are His family, brothers and sisters in Christ.

Mrs. Judie Brown, President

American Life League, Inc.


Ask The Experts:

An Interview with Mildred F. Jefferson, M.D.

President, Right to Life Crusade

As a medical professional, how do you regard the act of abortion?

The operation to destroy the developing unborn child is not a justifiable medical procedure. No one today should use the excuse of being unaware that the unborn child is a living human being. The stories of the "test tube babies" have brought information about life before birth to every person who is willing to listen. There can be no sensible public discussion with those who deny the life and humanity of the unborn child.

How did you become involved in the fight to protect unborn human life?

In 1970, the American Medical Association (AMA) had a resolution introduced before the house of delegates; it did not condone abortion, but provided a means of enabling doctors in states that had loosened abortion laws to comply with those laws and not be termed "unethical." It was a coldly pragmatic accommodation to reduce the malpractice risks of doctors in states with loosened abortion laws.

In Massachusetts, Dr. Joseph Stanton and Dr. Barbara Rockett circulated a petition asking physicians who objected to the resolution to sign. The resolution passed by a narrow margin, and then the fact of the resolution was used to try to persuade other doctors to relax ethical objections to abortion. I could not accept that duplicity. Those of us in Massachusetts who signed the petition against the resolution joined together to create an organization that could provide speakers and some balance against the drive to promote abortion. As a physician, I have a different role in this issue from most social activists. Jurists only have to hand down decisions; they don't have to see the consequences of decisions. Other activists may march, give speeches or carry placards. But when the time comes to implement these killing social policies, then they want to distance themselves and hand it over to us as doctors to carry out the killing mission. I am not willing to give up the traditional role of doctor as "healer" to become the new social executioner.

Do you believe that abortion has particular impact on African Americans and other minority groups?

Margaret Sanger's whole campaign to "free women from the prison of the marriage bed" and to "breed a race of thoroughbreds" laid the foundation for an active class war against the poor. Although minority groups are not the majority of the poor, the non-Spanish-speaking members of minority groups of African descent are the most visible and accessible of the poor.

If the current trend continues, with 44% of the abortion population being drawn from a segment that represents 12.1% of the general population, it is possible that there will be no indigenous population of African descent by the end of the next century. In the communities of these individuals, the death toll from diseases which are curable or manageable with early detection (cancer, high blood pressure, heart disease) is much higher than for the general population. Then add to that an excessive death toll from drugs, AIDS and epidemic homicide among its youth, and one has a population that is disappearing without being aware of it.

In our great pluralistic society, this is not genocide, it is national suicide.

Did Planned Parenthood originally intend to use birth control and abortion as a means to control the populations of low- income minority groups?

It wasn't just a matter of trying to control the population; it was a means to eradicate undesirable elements considered not worthy to contribute to society. The eugenics "race improvement," foundation of the Sanger birth control movement, preceded the population control movement. It was only later, as eugenics fell into disrepute when Hitler came to power, that the concept of population control was used to disguise the eugenic aspect of the birth control movement.

How can African Americans and other minority groups combat the impact of abortion?

We are going to have to put up walls of legal protection (a human life amendment, laws regulating abortion clinics, etc.) just to gain the time to let these target populations begin to defend themselves. Only then can we develop an educational reach to these populations.

We're going to have to get control of the killing first and then reach these people to let them know why they shouldn't "get into the net."

If nothing is done to stop abortion, what do you see as its long- term impact on society?

If we do not succeed in stopping the environmental folly of throwing away our only hope for perpetuation of the human family, mankind will become extinct. The willingness of women to destroy their unborn children represents the destruction of the survival instinct of our people. The nation that loses its survival instinct will become extinct. The USA sets the model for the world. And now we have the lethal impact of AIDS nationwide and worldwide to guarantee the extinction of mankind.


Dr. Mildred F. Jefferson received her medical degree at Harvard University and is a past president of the National Right to Life Committee. She is the recipient of many humanitarian awards.

Reprinted with permission of Human Development Resource Council, Inc., Georgia. This interview first appeared in the HDRC newsletter, Lifesupport, Fall, 1992.


Abortion: The Robbing of a Heritage

by Rev. Johnny Hunter

Executive Director, Life Education and Resource Network

Abortion is racism in its ugliest form. Because of some very suave planning by abortion supporters and providers, abortionists have eliminated more African American children than the KKK ever lynched. This is one truth that is very disturbing. Think about it. From 1973 to 1992, abortionists have snuffed out the lives of over nine million African American children before their first birthday. Over nine million beautiful black children were prevented from ever having the opportunity to become artists, musicians, doctors, teachers, lawyers, judges, taxi drivers, ambulance drivers, nurses, secretaries, senators, representatives, salesmen, sales clerks, computer programmers, analysts, managers, waitresses, waiters, tellers, leaders, followers, ordinary people, extraordinary people, parents, grandparents, and ancestors. They were robbed of the most essential of all rights--the right to life. They were robbed of their opportunities, and those of us who remain are robbed of their contributions to humanity.

When liberal racists defend abortion as a way to help blacks, I challenge them to show me the bodies of the dead African American children the abortionists have helped.

When a plantation Negro says he supports abortion because he cares about the sisters, mothers and daughters, he is a hypocrite of the lowest order. To deny the next generation of brothers and sisters the right to exist is the ultimate self-destructing mechanism in the African American community.

When two out of every three minority babies are aborted, it doesn't take a mathematical genius to understand the effect this will have on the minority race in the United States of America.

I find it dangerous the way abortion is promoted today. In the July 1992 issue of Life magazine, you will read an attempt by white media to be objective. It amazes me that objectivity means printing and showing both sides of abortion, which kills babies, but avoids showing the victims the effect of violence on the abortion table.

I am glad the media are not being objective about hard drugs. If they covered it like abortion, they would have to let the drug dealers get equal time to show the good side of the business (high salaries for teens) but avoid showing victims of overdose and the effect of violence in the drug world.

In the article titled "The Great Divide," a young black woman getting an abortion is pictured twice and quoted several times. The black man, who is a pro-life leader and supports the right to life for all children, was only pictured once and never quoted. Also, two young white women are both comforting the black woman while she is getting an abortion. What the reader does not know is that the white woman holding the hand of the black woman treats black women who attempt to offer help to their sisters before they enter a clinic in a much different way. She curses and body-checks them.

I suspect that the editors of Life magazine made a calculated decision with total disregard for the racist implications of this "objective" article. Of course they almost showed Tia, who according to a pathologist was a victim of an induced abortion. However, to be objective, they did refer to the child as a fetus and mentioned a county coroner's opinion that the fetus was a stillborn. They did not mention that the reputable medical sources believed the child was a child of color. Was Life magazine supporting racism and annihilation of the black race? I believe so. Was it intentional? For some on their staff, no; for others, yes; although they will not admit it. The most liberal white (person), while supporting abortion, does not want to be exposed for encouraging abortion of black children.

The saddest crisis of all is the ignorance and indifference displayed by prominent black people and black magazines. The September 1992 issue of Ebony magazine contains a full-page advertisement favoring abortion, produced by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, Inc. The ad smacks of the racist overtones of Margaret Sanger's "Negro Project." Margaret Sanger, who founded Planned Parenthood, implemented the "Negro Project" in 1939 to eliminate those she called "human weeds." Her recommendation to the steering committee was,

". . . let's attempt to let the colored run it . . ."

From her grave, this prejudiced woman is still using ignorant colored (people) to keep the "Negro Project" in operation.

The men featured in the ad, entitled "African American Men for Choice," are totally uninformed or indifferent to the fate of the millions of African American children who will be painfully destroyed because African American women respected their opinion. These are some of the dumbest smart men on earth.

Please examine a few of the lines in this ad. The title says, "African American Men for Choice," which means they have believed the great lie. The great lie being the one where Planned Parenthood changed the question to one concerning a woman's reproductive rights instead of concerning a baby safely snuggled in his/her mother's womb. The ad's first statement is "Today, we are taking a stand side by side with women to guard their most fundamental right. The right to choose."

This is the great abominable lie. The most fundamental right every human being has is life. If a child is not allowed to live, all other rights become moot. This is what bothers me most about so-called social leaders. There are leaders who fight for better health care, better housing, better job opportunities, better education and safer playgrounds. All these things, including the safe playgrounds mean nothing to dead African American babies. An aborted baby needs no health care. An aborted child needs no place to live. The dead baby will never have a career. You cannot educate an aborted child, which is sad, hearing them say, "A mind is a terrible thing to waste." The African American Men for Choice believe it is O.K. to waste a mind and a body as long as the woman agrees. My eleven-year-old son called them "The African American Men for Death"!

Ebony should know better, since many who would have been readers are now dead! They died at the hands of abortionists.

The legacy and heritage we are leaving are the most important treasure we can give our children. As African Americans, it is our responsibility to leave a legacy to the next generation, one upon which they may build a better life for themselves. Many great men and women have left us a heritage, but much of our heritage was robbed by slave owners. Two hundred years ago our African American heritage was robbed by a group of elitist individuals who intentionally kept us ignorant concerning the devastating effect of slavery. Today, our heritage is being robbed by elitist individuals who have intentionally kept us ignorant concerning the devastating effect of abortion on our race. They are robbing us to profit from the deaths of our sons and daughters.

The time has come for people of all races, religions, creeds and nations to stand up on behalf of the next generation of children. It is time to reclaim what is left of a broken legacy of enduring love and strength through faith in God. It is time to no longer use excuses of poverty. Who knows whether or not this is the child who will bring his family out of poverty.

It is time to no longer use the excuse of having this child later. No man and woman can ever conceive the same child twice.

It is time to no longer use the excuse of a more convenient time, after the promotion. Many first sons who should have been the recipients of their parents' heritage and wealth were robbed by an untimely death. It is time to insist that no child ever face discrimination because of race and/or place or residence. It is time that African American men and women insist that their children and their children's neighbors no longer be denied the inalienable right to life and the opportunity to appreciate their heritage. There is an old African proverb which says, "No one knows whose womb holds the chief." Have they killed the chief? I hope not, but I do know that many of the chief's people have been destroyed in a war directed at them in their most defenseless moments.


Anti-Abortion Politics and the Victims' Army

by William B. Allen, Ph.D.

Dean, James Madison College

Michigan State University

The following is from an address given on July 4, 1992, at the "And Justice for All" rally in Baton Rouge, LA, reprinted with permission from the Washington Compendium.

This Fourth of July comes upon us with unexpected recognition that the obligation to fight for liberty outpaces the temptation to celebrate liberty. Our nation promises security for the rights of persons and property. That is the portion our forebears willed to us at the cost of enormous personal sacrifice. They resisted the implications of tyranny, not out of ideological fervor, but as the duty imposed by God on those who would justify themselves in His eyes. Their efforts conceived a political life dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, endowed by our Creator with rights to life and liberty.

Today the healthy growth and development of the political life created by the Founders is undergoing a severe test. A growing army of victims to the systematic and legally enforced denial of the right to life accusingly present mute testimony that we are but political bastards and not true flesh of the founding flesh, blood of the providential blood that watered the tree of liberty.

Legions of unborn children, assassinated in the name of personal liberty, condemn us for what we have become--the prodigal heirs of an unmerited political salvation. Today we can redeem ourselves, and merit the blessings of liberty, only to the extent that we participate with that army of victims in a holy crusade to restore the right to life as the first foundation of political liberty. Our own lives may not be considered secure in guiltless reliance upon the rule of law, until we shall have completely and effectively prohibited the wanton destruction of innocent life. No people are free to celebrate liberty, among whom innocent life is a cheap commodity to be wasted in transactions of pleasure.

Thus far we surely stand together, we who gather here in solemn re-dedication to justice for all. But let us not stop here. Let us inquire further how we may lead on this victims' army to victory.

A wise field marshal once observed that "an army marches on its belly," meaning that soldiers will last out a campaign only as long as they can be fed. This is still more true of the victims' army, which is an army of foot soldiers feeding on the bread of life.

It has often seemed paradoxical to many that this massive movement in defense of the unborn seems to have no bona fide general--no Martin Luther King--at the head of its advancing columns. To me that is no paradox. The generals in this war are the departed children themselves, who lead us on with a certain tread. They point out the way for us, toward a heavenly reunion. The strategy is theirs--ever mounting witness to the sanctity of life. The tactics are theirs--infantry marching straight into a nation's heart, to turn it around.

We who fight from this side of heaven can only be infantrymen, but we could not have better generals. When we listen to the children we hear the purity of purpose Christ recognized in their voices. When we follow the children, we follow unselfish motives. We can arrive at the fathers' place, the victory of liberty, only through the children.

Let us say, then, "Onward, good foot soldiers. Let none turn back. Sup first on the bread of life, then march without ceasing."

Acknowledge also that there are cooks and waiters who must rely upon material means in order to serve up each day our diet of devotion. For Operation Rescue National, for Missionaries to the Pre-Born, Turn the Hearts, and all other efforts that are steady and faithful, you must contribute money and do so regularly.

Further, if we can expect to prevail in this war, it must be by means of such moral force as will deserve success. Foot soldiers who pray as they go are more likely to understand their generals' commands. But we may not confuse our prayers with God's wishes. Let us remember Abraham Lincoln's wisdom: in a great war of no less moral significance Lincoln recognized the brother in the enemy. We pray to the same God, he said. We cannot predict the outcome of the war from the fervency of our prayers. We must rather have faith that right will make might.

It is not sufficient to be right; we must embrace right. That was Lincoln's wisdom. Returning into the bosom of the Founding, re-embracing its principles wholly, and not just in part, Lincoln prepared his compatriots to embrace right and thus to invoke the judgment of heaven in their behalf.

Equality is the universal solvent for every moral dilemma in American political life. A crusade to save the unborn in which the re-dedication to equality is not plainly stated marches into battle half-prepared, or perhaps unprepared. They are not fellow-soldiers in this crusade, who cannot embrace the full promise of equality. They are a fifth column, doubtless solicitous of life (or perhaps fearful of death) but unable to derive its moral basis.

Not only can such allies not provide the strength needed to defend life; more important, they retard the effort to speak to the needs of American politics. Yes, I say, in order to advance the serious work of this crusade, we require absolutely to raise up voices steeped in true American principles--and not mere conservative resentments--voices squarely committed to embrace equality.

The anti-abortion movement long resisted conscription into political campaigns for reasons such as these. It was right to do so, as long as any joint campaign would have meant subordinating the anti-abortion movement to a mere political agenda.

Now that has all changed. The anti-abortion movement is frequently involved with political campaigns, often victoriously. In raising new standards for cooperation with candidates, the movement has properly recognized that ultimate moral victory will come only with rooting the principle of the movement in the political soul of the nation.

Unfortunately, however, the anti-abortion movement has not been as careful as needed in stating in advance terms of relationship with political candidates. That casual approach has opened doors for political leaders with no more than a rhetorical relationship with the movement to colonize its resources, draft its volunteers, and speak in its name without advancing the anti- abortion movement.

Further, the political leaders who have taken greatest advantage of the anti-abortion movement have carried the movement into alliances wholly incompatible with the movement. When, for example, political leaders who reject equality are identified as "pro-life spokesmen," the anti-abortion movement comes also to be seen as opposed to equality.

Many of the most thoughtful leaders of the anti-abortion movement have frequently compared their labors to those of the civil rights movement. That constitutes an embarrassment for political leaders who still have not accepted the goals of the civil rights movement--who still in fact harbor prejudices and attitudes that make skin color the fundamental basis of their political decisions.

When such politicians become spokesmen for the pro-life movement they compromise the movement and undermine the comparison to the civil rights movement. In order for the anti-abortion movement to make that comparison valid, it must itself embrace the goals of the civil rights movement from the 1960's--the goal of common citizenship illuminated by common rights derived from God.

The anti-abortion movement must concentrate its work on saving the unborn, but it must actively demonstrate no less concern for eradicating bigotry and discrimination in the life and politics of our nation. It must prove itself committed to justice for all.

In the future, therefore, the anti-abortion movement must adhere to clear standards determining its cooperation or alliances with politicians. It will not be good enough to find a silver tongue that lines speeches with the golden images of holy writ or speaks vaguely of a Judeo-Christian heritage.

Armies advance with manpower and ammunition. Politicians who can bring neither to the holy crusade of anti-abortion should not be raised up as spokesmen for the movement. I believe that no candidate who has not stood or marched with the victims' army should ever again receive the official support of that army's soldiers.

Nor, in the second place, should this army ever again support any political pretender who does not make clear in word and deed his embrace of the goals of the civil rights movement. Politicians who cannot recognize the brother in the enemy's face cannot sustain brothers and sisters who have prepared themselves for every sacrifice. The language of "us and them" is not the language of redemption. Let us put it off from ourselves.

These two guidelines for political involvement by the anti- abortion movement would provide a sure foundation for Christ-like submission to a purpose worthier than self. They would enable the movement more effectively to aim its blows at those souls where victory ultimately will be won.

One of the dangers of early reliance on political power to clear the stain of abortion from our nation's garment was precisely the temptation to substitute the expression of political will for that reformation--that regeneration--of moral conscience which is the true goal.

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court's decision in Planned Parenthood v. Casey we see dramatic evidence that many have been seduced by that temptation. They long so passionately to hear those few words "Roe v. Wade is overturned" that they are blind to the reality that Roe has long since been voided of moral meaning. The cries of despair over Justices O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter as traitors to the cause ignore the truth that, however incoherent their statements about precedents, they have succeeded to bring to the surface the very same internal contradictions of Roe which many of us pointed out nineteen years ago--leaving the contradictions, and not the moral principle, all that remains of Roe.

That is a victory, and ought to be recognized as such. The victory was not granted by the Court but won by the victims' army. It is not a final victory. It is but one of the stages on the way to redemption. Nevertheless, it is vital to see it for what it is and not to be counseled by despair. Despair has led good people to prefer the lurking "don't care" nihilism of Justice Scalia's dissent, to the model slowly emerging from the majority--namely, gradually building the power to regulate abortion, anticipating the day of outright prohibition. This is clearly a case where despair leads, not only to rejecting the good in hope of the better, but pursuing the worst for lack of the best.

Let us be clear: There is not in our future some resurrrection proclamation that will restore the victims' army to life here and now. No Supreme Court decision, no Executive Order, no Act of Congress will constitute the ultimate victory, for the ultimate victory is a people reclaimed for a providential mission on earth--a nation dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal, and in which liberty is the expression, not of our personal preferences, but our moral power.


Dr. Allen has been a member of the United States Commission on Civil Rights since 1987; he is a frequent speaker and author and earned his doctoral degree in government, specializing in political philosophy, American government and jurisprudence.


Lord, How Long Will "Pro-Choice" Whites

Kill Our Black People

While Claiming to Help Us?

by Dr. E. Jean Thompson

International Black Women's Network

P.O. Box 90972

Washington, DC 20090-0972

When it comes to discrimination, I cannot help but think of Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, and the many other black heroes and heroines who fought against slavery and its atrocities. I am also reminded of the passionate black preachers such as Rev. James C. Pennington as well as white preachers such as Rev. Charles Finney who preached the Word of God without compromise. They proclaimed the Gospel of Jesus Christ relentlessly to "let the oppressed go free."

Today, however, slavery once again must be abolished in our beloved nation--once again, slaves must be freed. According to Webster's dictionary, a slave is defined as a human being who is owned as property by another and is absolutely subject to that person's will--a bond servant divested of all freedom and personal rights. This definition was applied to blacks in the Dred Scott decision of 1857, which said that blacks were the property of the slave owners and had no rights. Their owners could kill, mutilate or sell them. This definition applies to the unborn baby in view of the Roe v. Wade decision of 1973, which indicated virtually the same thing--that the modern-day slaves (unborn children) were the property of their slave owners (their mothers) and had no rights, even of life . . .

I say, let us abolish this new modern slavery and let these unborn children have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness . . . Frederick Douglass, Harriet Tubman, and thousands of others stood against the "pro-choice"--that is, pro-slavery--groups of their day. The "pro-choice groups" back then said they had the right and the freedom to do whatever they wanted with their slaves . . . I call the pro-abortion movement America's modern-day slavery. But like many others, I call it black genocide. The shocking fact is that although blacks make up only 12 percent of the nation's population, over 43 percent of all aborted babies are black. In places like Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the alarmingly disproportionate abortion rate for blacks is 72 percent.

Sojourner Truth and the other great abolitionists are not alive today, but my husband and I, along with millions across the U.S., are picking up the torch of freedom and proclaiming, "Let the oppressed go free!"


Pictured here with her husband, Dr. James J. Thompson, and their daughter Sherah Danielle, Dr. Thompson co-pastors Harvest Church in Mt. Rainier, Maryland, with her husband.


The Christian Mother and A Good Christian Father

Two Short Reflections

by Rev. Joseph E. Parker

Christian Family Seminars

104 Glendale St.

Ripley, MS 38663

The Christian Mother

In the Word of God, some of the most important characteristics of a Christian mother are given to us. Both Old and New Testaments give aspects of her character which give honor both to the Lord and to her. What are some of those attributes? Let's consider a few.

She loves God and serves Him. Matthew 6:33

She studies the Word of God regularly. Psalms 119:106

She is very prayerful, takes time to pray about all the areas of her life. Acts 16:13

She is a witness for the Lord in her home and she encourages her family to follow the Lord too, taking time to teach her children about God's Word. Proverbs 2:1, 3:1, and II Timothy 1:5

She works hard seeing after the needs of her family and is compassionate towards others in need. Proverbs 31:10-27

Let us, like the children and husband of Proverbs 31: 28-29, take the time to show and demonstrate gratitude and appreciation for our wives and mothers.

A Good Christian Father

Listen, my sons, to a father's instruction; pay attention and gain understanding.

When I was a boy in my father's house, still tender and an only child of my mother, he taught me and said, "Lay hold of my words with all your heart; keep my commands and you will live." Proverbs 4:1, 3 and 4.

God gives us in His Word some of the most important characteristics or attributes of a Christian father. We can find some of those characteristics in both the Old and New Testaments.

What are some of those characteristics? Let's consider a few of them.

He has made Jesus Christ Lord and Savior of his life, and he leads his family in serving the Lord. Joshua 24:15

He seeks to be a good provider, providing well for the physical and material needs of his family and home. I Timothy 5:8

He regularly prays with and before his family and regularly reads the Word of God with and before his family in the home.

He takes time to train and instruct his children, teaching them wisdom for all areas of life. Proverbs 2:1-9, 3:1-2, 4:1-6

The world needs many more Christian fathers. Please take time to pray for the fathers of our local church families, our communities, our nation and our world. And, be sure to take extra time to thank and praise our great and precious Heavenly Father, especially for His graciousness in giving us our earthly Christian fathers made in His image.


Rev. Parker has served as an African American minister for the past sixteen years and is working closely with Mississippi Life League to increase pro-life/pro-family awareness in the black community.


Non-academic Classroom Distractions

by Thomas Sowell

Mr. Thomas Sowell is an economist and a senior fellow at the Hoover Institution, Stanford, CA. Mr. Sowell is also a syndicated columnist and this column is reprinted with the permission of Thomas Sowell and Creator's Syndicate.

There was a recent flap in New York City over first-grade textbooks about "daddy's roommate" and a girl who "has two mommies." Both books were designed to accustom first-graders to the idea of homosexual parents.

The flap was over one school district that objected, not all the other districts that quietly accepted this remaking of social values as a role for the public schools. Even in the one unwilling school district, some objected only that the first grade was too early for this kind of thing.

Much of this missed the point. What are American public schools doing getting into such things in the first place? Do they have time and energy to dissipate in ideological crusades to reshape the values of other people's children, when educators are failing miserably to convey the academic skills they are being paid to teach?

No small part of the reason why American schoolchildren fall so far behind their contemporaries in other countries in international comparisons of educational achievement is that Japanese and other youngsters are studying math, science and other solid subjects while our children are being brainwashed with the latest ideological fashions--whether about homosexuality, environmentalism, multiculturalism or a thousand other non-academic distractions.

Too many critics have allowed themselves to be drawn off on a tangent to discuss the merits or demerits of these particular ideologies. The more fundamental objection to teaching this stuff is that we are not sending our children to school to have their values and psyches remolded to suit ideological zealots on world-saving crusades. It is cheap, cowardly and dishonest to target children--and especially to do so behind the backs of their parents.

Let these crusaders pick on somebody their own size, instead of taking advantage of children who were entrusted to their care for entirely different purposes.

Few parents or citizens realize the pervasiveness of classroom brainwashing, or the utter dishonesty with which it is smuggled into the schools under misleading labels.

Does anyone ask himself why it should take years and years to teach schoolchildren so-called "sex education"? Obviously it does not. What takes years and years is to wear down the values they were taught at home and lead them toward wholly different attitudes and wholly different conceptions of the world.

Brainwashing takes time--and it takes this time away from academic subjects. First-grade textbooks promoting homosexual lifestyles are only the opening salvo in year after year of assaulting children's values. The issue is not homosexuality or the relative merits of traditional vs. avant-garde beliefs. The issue is: Whose children are these?

By what right do other people usurp the responsibilities of parents and use the schools to carry on guerilla warfare against the values that parents have taught their children?

Sex education is just the tip of the iceberg. There is, for example, also "death education," which often includes excursions to morgues, funeral homes and graveyards--as well as classroom exercises in which children are asked who should live and who should die (including members of their own families) when a lifeboat is too overcrowded to hold everyone.

What is the purpose of all this? Whether the subject is sex education, death education, environmentalism, nuclear power or innumerable other ideological issues, the purpose is to impose the attitudes, values and world outlook of the anointed on other people's children.

The zealots know what they are doing, and are well aware of its illegitimacy. One teacher's manual for a widely used program includes instructions on how to evade parents' complaints and how to deal with students who don't go along. A mother who complains individually is almost certain to be told that she is the only one who has ever objected. There may be controversies raging from coast to coast, and even lawsuits filed over the program, but you will still be told that you are the only one who has complained.

Complain in a group and the cry will be "censorship." The education establishment knows how to play the game of heads-I-win-and-tails-you-lose. To the media, each program is an "innovation" to be judged in isolation--and usually not very critically. They do not understand that each program, which may seem only questionable in isolation, is part of a much larger brainwashing effort--and it is that distortion of the whole purpose of American education that is truly outrageous.

Clausewitz said that war was the continuation of politics by other means. Too many people in the education establishment, at all levels, treat education as the continuation of ideological crusades by other means.

The glib gurus who set the trends are at war with all the fundamental values of this country and this civilization. You would have to know these people, or read their writings, or see their "art," to understand the venom in their hatred. To such people, our children's education is a small sacrifice on the altar to their vision.


Racism and Abortion

by Erma Clardy Craven

Erma Clardy Craven is a pro-life leader and expert in the field of social and human services among the less fortunate

Racism is different from racial prejudice. Racial prejudice refers to thoughts and feelings. Racism means specific actions that harm or discriminate against people because of their race, such as racially targeted abortions. There are two major kinds of racism.

Individual and Institutional. Individual racism occurs when someone overtly decides to harm or injure another because of his race. It involves an individual acting on his own or a group of individuals committing acts against a person or groups of persons because of race. Examples in America are the Klu Klux Klan, and abortionists who perform abortions with strong anti-race biases.

Institutional racism is more difficult to understand because it is more deceptive, less visible, better organized than individual racism. Institutional racism is found in governments, corporations, unions, schools, churches, court systems, and law enforcement agencies, to name a few. Institutional racism occurs whenever an institution harms an individual or a group because of racial considerations.

Race suicide is the gradual dying out of a people as a result of the deliberate failure of its members to maintain a birth rate equal to its death rate. The encouragement of a people to deliberately kill its unborn children by abortion is race suicide.

The systematic promotion of abortion and the deliberate medical practice of abortion by an institution on a given people as sterilization of a given people is genocide.

Race and genocide were the factors that caused me to become involved in the right to life movement. The preborn child becomes a non-person, a being that is discriminated against in the same manner as Afro-Americans have been treated in our 400 years in this country.

I became involved in the pro-life movement over twenty years ago after listening to a debate between pro-abortion and pro-life advocates. The debate was sponsored by the Minneapolis Junior Chamber of Commerce. At that time the issue of abortion laws were emerging.

Abortion had been considered to be murder. The word "abortion" was so obscene that people did not talk about it openly. Members of the medical profession who performed abortions were held in low esteem and occasionally one could read of criminal action against an abortionist.

The debate signalled a changing attitude toward abortion as well as changing attitudes about sexual behavior. It coincided with the sexual revolution of the sixties and the feminist movement of the seventies.

As I listened to the debate then and over the past twenty years, and debated, researched and studied the pro-abortion movement, I became firmly convinced that it was not exclusively about hardship and life-threatening pregnancies, but that it had the insidious characteristics of a Neo-Nazi movement. Its rhetoric is racist, even genocidal. The key phrase is "no life that cannot sustain itself has the right to exist." The preborn child is a non-person being dehumanized so that it can be destroyed for any reason. The preborn child can be destroyed because it may be born into poverty if the parents are poor and may have to survive on welfare. The preborn child can be destroyed if it does not measure up to someone's ideal of human perfection, or if the child is to be born to persons of color, especially black, Indian or Asian. It really shouldn't have the right to exist.

Then the Zero Population movement emerged with its concern of overpopulation to ensure that the wealth and resources would be controlled by the very elite. I became convinced that abortion on demand is not about choice but about survival.

The history of the struggle for survival of the black woman in America must be told openly and honestly so that her situation can be fully understood. Her struggle for survival on this continent has been heroic. She has survived the institution of slavery and contributed much to this country with her brain. Her womb was the breeding incubator for slave masters' children which help to make America grow and become the richest nation in the world.

When the issue of illegitimacy comes up, black women think about the time when illegitimacy was not such a righteous issue during 350 years of slavery, illegitimacy was promoted.

Every black woman on welfare with dependent children longed for a stable husband with a job, a decent home and quality education for her children. The welfare system needs to be reformed so that the biological fathers of welfare children can come out of the closet and be legitimately recognized as fathers and trained for jobs so that they can support their families. They are present and can be easily located without much effort, even those in prison.

Training should be given to welfare mothers so that they can support themselves if the fathers of their children are too inadequate to meet the family's needs and for their own self- esteem. Allowances should be made for work and training programs for all children attending public schools. No child should be socially passed. No child should graduate without some marketable skill and such practices on race do not benefit society in total.

If the billions of tax dollars spent on abortion and the sex industry were utilized for the creation of jobs, the birth rate would drop because the sex drive would be diverted into constructive social good. An excellent reason to promote affirmative action work training programs.

Women have been provided for in marriage and through this institution raised their children legitimately and in stable homes. The key is an employed head of household. Common- law marriages, couples being together in a consensual relationship without benefit of a legal or religious ceremony. Today, this form of marriage is increasing among the white upper middle class, divorced as well as single persons.

The common-law marriage was very common among poor, unskilled or low-paid women. They had a companion for sexual needs as well as some degree of financial stability. For many women this was an economic necessity. Today, it has become a chic and fashionable life style for the middle class.

The poor woman who seeks a mate with limited choices of stable men finds herself on welfare and in government subsidies. She is exploited by the men in her life and oppressed by the system, and the millions of abortions done in that state. Many but not all are women of color, not only black, but Indians, Asian, Latinos, Hispanics and poor white women. Because of their poor economic status, they live in inner cities where drug traffic, crime, prostitution, pornographic shops, homeless street people with problems of mental illness and drug abuse prevail. Trapped in run-down, rat-infested multi-dwelling units with absentee landlords and massive public housing properties, they live with their children in hopeless conditions. They basically only are on urban plantations, where they have no real dignity and no real rights. Long-term frustration and suppressed rage eventually explode into major riots such as Watts in the 1960's and L.A. in 1992 following the Rodney King verdict, the worst civil disturbance in years. Racism and poverty cause these civil outbursts.

Did California's liberalized abortion laws and the millions of abortions done in that state solve the hard-core problems of poverty, homelessness and racism? On the contrary, the smoldering fires of rage, deprivation, and frustration have turned the clock back for California for many years. The high costs are not only social and economic, but also a cost in lives.

Legalizing abortion, in particular, being force on people of color, has been touted as the ultimate solution for all our social problems. Adolf Hitler promoted an agenda targeting the Jews during his administration of the Third Reich in Germany. He targeted selected groups of people for extermination; among these groups of people were the Jews. His program was called the "final solution."

We have seen strange similarities between the Nazi movement in Germany and the liberalizing of abortions in the United States of America. The not-so-well-masked abortion rhetoric and the final solution agenda are the same.

Let us take a hard look at the culture our children are exposed to. Sex and violence in all of the media, sexual exploitation and promotion without cognitive development to fully grasp the purpose and meaning of human sexuality. Sex-based clinics with contraceptive distribution and abortion referrals initially introduced in inner-city schools targeting impoverished poor children and integrating its methods of sexual exploitation into white middle-class educational institutions.

Venereal disease and AIDS statistics continue to rise. The health and survival of the nation are in great danger. If we are to survive as a nation, we must work together as a unified people to solve our problems. Racism and Abortion are not the solutions, they are part of the problem, along with poverty.

The challenge for pro-lifers is to address all of these issues aggressively and not submit to defeat in the interest of true racial justice.


Erma Clardy Craven has been a probation officer with magistrate courts, New York City, girls's term and women's division, as well as a social worker for Hennepin County (Minnesota). She is a well-known author and lecturer.


© 1996, American Life League

Return to ABORTION FAQ or return to