By Andy Kirchoff
Today, thousands of Americans of all political persuasions mourn the ongoing tragedy of legalized baby-killing in this country. On this day in 1973, SCOTUS handed the American people the pile of legal gibberish known as Roe v. Wade, which legalized abortion procedures during all moments of a pregnancy – even up until the very moment of birth itself. Over 50 million Americans have been killed by abortion in the 39 years that have passed since this tragic decision. That is 50 million too many.
While I am unable to attend the March for Life this year as I have in years past, I stand in solidarity with the countless number of pro-life Americans (including two of my younger brothers, who are joining in the March for Life today) in working and praying for an end to abortion. I also offer the GOP my gratitude for opening its doors to pro-life Americans such as myself looking for a political home. With the Obama administration and the Democratic Party at large opposing even the most modest regulations on abortion procedures, it’s safe to say that the ever-growing number of pro-life Americans will continue to be drawn to Republican candidates so long as the party continues to stand in favor of the unborn.
Unfortunately, the GOP has allowed Planned Parenthood and other abortion-aligned allies quite a bit more wiggle room in the GOP since 2008. No, I’m not talking about the nomination and election of staunchly pro-choice RINOs like Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL) and Sen. Susan Collins (R-ME), as bad as they are. I’m talking about the infiltration of the GOP and the Tea Party by anti-immigration organizations like NumbersUSA, FAIR, and the Minutemen – all of whom are either bankrolled and/or staffed by abortionists, eugenicists, racists, and other operatives from the culture of death. Yes, you read that correctly. Planned Parenthood and its allies in the abortion industry are directly connected to the “anti-amnesty,” “border security,” “anti-illegal immigration” movement in this country.
Let’s start with FAIR, the Federation of Americans for Immigration Reform. FAIR openly advocates for strong enforcement measures like SB1070, E-Verify, and legal immigration caps, while opposing efforts to streamline legal immigration. This group is commonly cited when the issue of illegal immigration is raised in news reports, especially amongst conservatives; FAIR’s statistics have been used by Bill O’Reilly, Gov. Jan Brewer of AZ, and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX), among many others. It’s the largest and most well-funded organization of its type in the country.
FAIR was started by a man named John Tanton, who founded Planned Parenthood of Northern Michigan back in 1972. He continues to openly advocate for abortion, as his letters to supporters indicate quite clearly. His racism and anti-Catholic prejudice is clearly documented. But FAIR’s connections to the abortion rights movement run far deeper than Tanton; FAIR’s Board of Directors is a veritable laundry list of abortion advocates and pro-choice stalwarts. Sarah G. Epstein, FAIR’s Secretary, is on the Board for Planned Parenthood in Washington State. Alan Weeden, another member of FAIR’s Board of Directors, has connections with Planned Parenthood International. Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-CA), head of FAIR’s political outreach, is a pro-choice Republican. There’s even Joyce Tarnow, a Florida abortionist who famously said Haitian earthquake victims should “stew in their own juices,”who was until very recently listed on FAIR’s website as a member of their Board of Directors.
Another prominent “anti-illegal immigration” organization that is playing a particularly outsized role in the current GOP presidential primary is NumbersUSA, headed by Roy Beck. Beck is a close friend of John Tanton, and his website has advocated for “family planning services” (read: abortion). NumbersUSA is not content to end illegal immigration; for them, virtually all immigration must be slowed down or stopped. Unsurprisingly, this extreme and economically detrimental position has led many a racist into the ranks of the organization, and John Tanton has kept his close eye on the organization the entire time. NumbersUSA, too, has been actively supported and even cited by some grassroots conservative activists and tea party groups – a fact that should make every pro-life Republican and tea partier shiver.
It may not be immediately obvious to pro-lifers that abortion advocates and eugenicists should be so interested in immigration issues. I myself was incredulous when evidence of this connection was first presented to me. Since when does Planned Parenthood’s racist, abortion-supporting agenda have anything to do with immigration? Well, as anyone who’s viewed Maafa21 can tell you, the pro-choice movement has always about racism and eugenics, not empowering women, and the “anti-illegal immigration” movement has never been about “border security,” either. Allowing women to kill their own children is not a promotion of “women’s rights.” Likewise, allowing government to enter people’s homes and detain and/or separate them from their families does absolutely nothing to improve border security. Both acts do, however, violate human dignity – something the government is supposed to defend and protect, not violate.
Pro-life conservatives owe it to themselves to confront this menace head on. Conservative politicians cannot be allowed to advocate for Planned Parenthood’s agenda, whether its abortion “rights” or enforcing “the law.” Lincoln and Reagan had no place for such things, and neither should we.
I`m skeptical of your statements Andy.
~~
Rick Santorum is not a viable presidential candidate and especially because of his crude anti-abortion views.
You can stay skeptical all you want, but the facts are as plain as day. All the links to support my claims are there. The pro-abortion movement and the anti-immigrant movement are joined at the hip; How Roy Beck, John Tanton and others have managed to deceive so many pro-lifers into supporting their decidedly anti-life agenda is quite a feat, to be certain, but that they did so is unquestionable.
BTW, this is already linked in the post, but for those wanting a more comprehensive look at this subject, take a look at this blog here:
http://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2010/06/26/eugenics-population-control-and-racism-inside-numbers-usa-roy-beck-fair-john-tanton-pioneer-fund-and-planned-parenthood/
Border security and anti-illegal immigration are things I’m concerned about too. Just because we’re pro-life does not mean we need to support completely open borders and illegal immigration. Both should be regulated.
Few if any immigration reform advocates support open borders. Throwing out labels like “open borders liberals” are calculated to make immigration reform advocates seem like we are from the fringes. Another tactic is to put the pejorative term “illegal” in front of immigrant, or worse yet alien, to stir fear. Alien, while a correct legal term, in modern day daily usage is used to describe creatures from outer space, not our fellow man. Also, when’s the last time you heard a jaywalker referred to as an illegal pedestrian?
We’re looking for a major overhaul of legal immigration. It’s senseless that we need more workers at both ends of the skills spectrum, yet we don’t update our laws to reflect America’s demographics. The last major overhaul was in 1965, at a time that American’s population was half of today’s, our economy in inflation-adjusted dollars was 20% of today’s, and half of native born adults in 1965 were high school dropouts, versus less than 10% today. We also have fewer young people due to legalized abortion.
Seven million undocumented immigrant workers represents the cumulative shortage of guest worker visas in low-skilled jobs. As for shortages in high skilled jobs, those shortages evaporated when companies relocated those jobs overseas, often filling those jobs with highly trained professionals trained in U.S. colleges and universities, who could not stay because there aren’t enough visas.
True, few immigration “reform” advocates support open borders officially.
However, the standard proposed “reforms” simply support effective open borders…
Essentially, the “reforms” always boil down to “come on in, do a job, while we prepare citizenship paperwork”, or amnesty acts every 20 years.
Unemployment in America is over 10%, and that’s with foreigners. There isn’t a shortage of workers, there are far too many already.
Thanks for this post Andy.
I’d also not that FAIR’s Epstein and her husband also are board members of the International Services Assistance Fund which is seeking approval of a surreptitious and unsafe permanent sterilization method called quinacrine pellets. They’ve already tried it out on women in the Third World even though the drug is not approved. ISAF is chaired by first-rate eugenic and anti-Catholic screwball Dr. Stephen Mumford.
Epstein is also a major contributor to EMILY’s List.
Thank you ANDY. I have been saying and documenting this for years. It’s a huge problem
Jack Smith, thank you for that information. I did not know Epstein had EMILY’s List connections.
Theresa, being pro-immigration is not to be pro-open borders. How does an “enforcement on steroids” approach to illegal immigration do anything to secure the border? I’m with Governor Rick Perry on that issue: boots on the ground, targeted fencing, but targeting people who have been here for years? Heck no!
So if someone continues to get away with bank robbery we should let them continue? Someone who remains in this country illegally breaks the law every day so there is no statue of limitaitons issue.
The US admits around ONE MILLION LEGAL immigrants a year and around the same number of temp workers. We have THE most liberal immigraiton policy i the world. It is a natural right for a country to maintain its soverignty and border integrity. Very few people are advocating eliminating LEGAL immigration. Your association with the anti-ILLEGAL immigration movement (if you have the honesty to call it that) with the abortion industry is a typical strawman and ad hominem attack method employed by progressives.
yaya,
You are mistaken about immigration policy. If you are a citizen of an EU country, you have the right to freely move between countries for work purposes. Much more liberal than the U.S. We actually have fairly strict immigration laws & regulations.
So very unsurprised by this. Thanks for posting.
Michael Patrick, NumbersUSA’s website openly brags about its Board Member’s connections to population control groups and Planned Parenthood.
http://www.numbersusa.org/pages/don-weeden
Here’s an article from NumbersUSA that clearly advocates family planning, too:
http://www.numbersusa.com/content/learn/issues/environment/third-world-growth-california-style.html
Very interesting information. Thank you, Mr. Kirchoff. Being founded in racism, and with a vast majority of abortuaries in places easily available to the black population, the connection of Planned Parenthood and FAIR makes perfect sense. If you didn’t provide enough proof to implicate NumbersUSA, you certainly did with FAIR. And as far as “legality” is concerned, the US government under President Polk declared it “legal” to take one third of this country away from Mexico just prior to the Civil War. It was a perfect example of Might makes Right barbarism. Much as I detest what President Grant did to the Indians, he did state as president that the Civil War was a divine punishment for our unjust aggression against Mexico. I am not saying that the US should return the southwest to Mexico, but I am saying that the word “illegal” may raise the question in a desperate Mexican’s mind, hoping to feed his children, “illegal” to whom?
Islam is generally against abortion. http://www.islamawareness.net/FamilyPlanning/Abortion/abortion1.html
Does this mean that being pro-life is an endorsement of the rest of Sharia law, that conservative politicians are really advancing some kind of radical agenda?
Material agreement with racists on whether people who enter the country illegally should be penalized does not imply formal agreement. The one thing can be a means to very different ends. Racism is not the only end, nor is it a necessary end.
A murder may cross a field to elude police. Someone else may cross the same field to meet his girlfriend. Does field crossing somehow become tainted by this?
A racist might oppose welfare. Should conservatives then advocate a nanny state if they are not racists?
A eugenicist might advocate getting rid of Medicare (to let the unfit die). Should conservatives support a national health plan if they do not support eugenics?
So, what exactly is the menace we’re supposed to be fighting against? What exactly is the pro-life position on immigration, now that we know the racist plan?
The “anti-illegal immigrant” argument has, indeed, a eugenics and racist and religiously bigoted founding history. That is just plain fact. However, the connection between PP and the other organizations sited here, NumbersUSA and FAIR, is relational, not causal. Planned Parenthood arose from the same pool of racists and bigots as did NumbersUSA and FAIR (both of which evolved from other organizations), but Planned Parenthood did not start, found or cause either of the latter. They grew in parallel to each other. Keeping immigrants, particularly Catholic immigrants, out of the country was the goal of the WASP liberal establishment, as was it the same establishment’s goal to control the population of “undesirable” races already in the country.
But racism is not the only reason to have secure borders and to regulate who enters the country and especially who stays here permanently. It is a matter of what those regulations and that security consists of and what they are ordered to.
By my remarks I am not taking any particular position, by the way. I am simply pointing out the difficulty of the logic. “Racists and pro-abortion people originated such-and-so. Therefore, pro-life people cannot support such-and-so.” Because right now, the pro-abortion folks seem pretty aligned also with very lax border policies, and it could be argued with this reasoning that this alone is a reason to be “anti-illegal-immigration.”
David Werling, thank you for the elucidation. The shared eugenics ideology is what keeps Planned Parenthood and FAIR joined at the hip (as opposed to the head).
Though I doubt prominent anti-immigration hawks like Santorum associate their position with PP, some of the rhetoric appears eerily similar. For instance, both anti-immigration groups and pro-choice groups cling heavily to the “rule of law” as the final deciding factor.
Is Santorum anti Immigration or anti ILLEGAL immigration? You write like a progressive.
As my link in the article demonstrates, Santorum, like NumbersUSA and FAIR, is anti-immigration, legal OR illegal:
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/2012ers-hard-line-against-immigration-illegal-legal-south-223127198.html
Immigration has been the central cause of social and class division in the USA. American Indians were subplanted through immigration. Slaves were taken against their will and disassociated from their land and culture in Africa. Indiscriminate immigration not based upon compatability but upon economic immigration has introduced ideologies such as Islam into the USA. The USA only brought about the downfall of Communism by excluding it! Hispanic immigration is the least of all worries. Hispanics are being excluded from territories which were Spanish/Hispanic territory before the USA claimed them. Assimilation or exclusion are the only 2 strategies that work in immigration.
One of the bedrock values of conservatives and Republicans is respect for the rule of law. One of the reasons that people emigrate from Mexico is that it lacks respect for rule of law.
Do you really think that you can sell your lawless agenda to two groups that so deeply cherish lawfulness?
I support the work of FAIR on immigration and I have no interest in the other positions in their past. If we only support people and groups who have never said anything we disagree with we will be alone and powerless.
Personally I think it is disgraceful of you to try to use the Pro-Life movement to further your anti-American agenda. I believe the two issues are unrelated and only pro-lawlessness groups try to tie them together.
FAIR and NumbersUSA continue to oppose *legal* as well as *illegal* immigration. This is obvious just from glancing at their respective websites. It is not a question of what they have done in the past; it’s what they continue to advocate for today. Epstein remains a pro-abortion advocate. Weeden has never disowned his work with Planned Parenthood, and Beck is happy to brag about it on the NumbersUSA website, as I already demonstrated with my links.
“FAIR and NumbersUSA continue to oppose *legal* as well as *illegal* immigration. ”
Yes, they both call for a temporary freeze on all immigration until we bring illegal immigration to a halt and make significant progress toward assimilating the immigrants we already have.
This is what is best for our country as a whole, what is best for our immigrants and also what is best for our most vulnerable groups such as minorities, the unemployed, the under-educated and young workers.
We need to stop pandering to special interest groups and do the right thing.
Koodos to the Saynsumth blogger who you linked to who gathered all this evidence !!!!
Absolutely. I am indebted to that blogger for providing such an extensive chronicle of the culture of death’s connection to the anti-immigration movement.
I am Pro-Life. Life begins at conception and ends at natural death.
As part of being Pro-Life I also oppose capital punishment in virtually every case.
I fully support strong borders and LEGAL immigration.
I support asylum from persecution. LEGAL asylum.
I support immigrant quotas and I support adjusting those quotas as our needs’ change.
I support Green Cards, visitor visas, student visas, etc.
I do not care what color the skin is, I don’t hate immigrants, legal or illegal. I want new citizens to follow the laws.
I do not understand why others refuse to accept my statements. Quit trying to read my mind, quit trying to “interpret” was I say. I am speaking plainly and I say what I mean.
Securing borders is not a new phenomenon, it wasn’t invented by Planned Parenthood or Margaret Sanger – they may be using the issue for their own desires but that does not invalidate the need for secure borders.
If you do not like the law then work to change the law.
Mary, I don’t see where your statements are being questioned.
As for FAIR, NumbersUSA, etc. their strategy is to flood the public awareness with jazzed up statistics, perpetuate age-old and largely discredited stereotypes, and outright lies so the public supports their extreme agenda. They are the culprits in blocking sensible immigration reforms. Not only do these organizations want strict enforcement of existing immigration laws, they want to roll back quotas to 1956 levels.
Also note that historically the U.S. has experienced surges in illegal immigration whenever our legal immigration system becomes disconnected with the needs of our economy. The same thing happened in the 1920s when very low quotas were first imposed, again in the 1950s when demand for guest workers far exceeded quotas, and then again in recent decades for the same reason.
This has to be one of the worst arguments yet I’ve seen against defending our borders. Sorry, you’re not going to get much traction with this one. Did you hear that Mussolini originated the idea of having the trains run on time? Ergo, anyone liking a well run rail system is a fascist…. I don’t think so. It seems many of our bishops and pro-illegal alien advocates just can’t grasp the concept that it is the fault of those breaking our immigration laws that leads to the separation of their families.
If you think “enforcing the law” is somehow a conservative or pro-life argument, you’re barking up the wrong tree. As Michael Carper pointed out a few comments above, That’s precisely the argument pro-choicers use to say that no changes can be made in abortion law: “Roe V Wade is a constitutional right, we can’t change that!”
There is absolutely no reason for small government conservatives to defend onerous big government laws devised by social engineers and eugenicists anymore than there’s a reason for pro-lifers and pro-family Christians to be supporting upholding laws that separate families.
So true, Andy. This nation didn’t have quotas until the 1920s, and eugenicists were the prime drivers of the quota system, which drastically limited immigration from Southern and Eastern Europe, with high quotas from Northern and Western Europe. Before quotas, there were outright bans on most Asian immigration, also based on racist considerations.
The nation quotas went away in 1965, but quotas remain. Quotas for unskilled guest workers are set extremely low, but are also low for highly skilled professionals. Historically, whenever quotas for immigrants or guest workers were set too low, illegal immigration was the result.
If you think about conservatism and free market capitalism vs. progressivism, our current immigration system is progressive, and based on the notion that government can do a better job of deciding how many immigrants or guest workers we need rather than free markets. More and more enforcement will only increase the disconnect between the needs of our economy and our immigration system, and rip apart families.
It’s time for a complete overhaul, and a new immigration system based on labor markets, not heavy handed government regulation.
Mr. Andy
I am for e-verify.
I am for showing my identification – drivers license when I vote.
Does that make me against immigration?
Does that make me against prolife positions?
I don’t think so.
C.
Mr. Patrick, you are a guest on this web site. Please refrain from making personal attacks and stick to issues.
Kindly edit your post to delete your attack on Mr. Kirchoff.