(August 14, 2016 at 6:04 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:(August 14, 2016 at 5:29 pm)Esquilax Wrote: No, I'm saying that "Margaret Sanger," is a distinct entity from "Planned Parenthood," and that asserting that the views of one necessarily represent the views of the other is both an equivocation, and an example of the genetic fallacy.
It's such an obvious, simple problem with your position that I'm forced to conclude you're simply doing what you always do, which is willfully defend obviously wrong propositions because you want to be right, more than you want to be factually correct.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Sanger
Quote:In 1921, Sanger founded the American Birth Control League, which later became the Planned Parenthood Federation of America.
Quote:From 1952 to 1959, Sanger served as president of the International Planned Parenthood Federation.
In what way do you figure "Margaret Sanger," is a distinct entity from "Planned Parenthood," when she is the founder?
1959 was quite a long time ago, Huggy. What Margaret Sanger's views were or were not, eugenics has nothing to do with what Planned Parenthood stands for today.
https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/...Sanger.pdf
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpoliti...population
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_Pa...d_eugenics
Nolite te bastardes carborundorum.
