"I found myself in danger, I cried out in despair
I prayed, "Lord let them hear me! Let just one person care!" I raised my voice to heaven as the train kept moving on
As we passed behind the church yard I could hear their worship songs I cried out all the louder to the Christians there inside,
but they raised the chorus louder not hearing me outside
I know they heard the whistle and the clacking of the tracks They knew that I was going to die and still they turned their backs I said, "Father in Heaven how can your people be
so very hard of hearing to the cry of one like me?"
I shouted, "Please have mercy! Just a prayer before I die!" But they sang a little louder to the Holy One on high.
They raised their hands to Heaven but blood was dripping down The blood of all the innocent their voices tried to drown
They have devotions daily, they function in My name
and they never even realized it was I upon that train."
-- Penny Lea. "Sing a Little Louder!"[1]
Anti-Life Philosophy.
"In our view, individuals who exhibit the least human dignity are those who compare the Holocaust, the mass murder of 6 million Jews, to abortion. There exists no comparison more immoral or depraved. It is both illogical and outrageous to suggest that the calculated murder of millions of children and adults can be equated with an individual woman's decision to terminate her pregnancy ..."
-- 'Masturbation guru' Sol Gordon.[2]
Why Such Vehemence?
"The greatest evil is not now done in those sordid "dens of crime" that Dickens loved to paint. It is not even done in concentration camps and labor camps. In those we see its final result. But it is conceived and ordered (moved, seconded, carried and minuted) by quiet men in clean, carpeted and well-lighted offices, by quiet men with white collars and cut fingernails and smooth-shaven cheeks who do not need to raise their voices."
-- C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters .[3]
The Psychology. Sol Gordon is certainly not alone in his condem- nation of pro-lifers for their audacity in comparing the Nazi Holocaust to the New American Holocausts of abortion, infanticide -- and euthanasia.
Pro-abortion medical 'ethicist' Dr. Sissela Bok insists that any comparison between the original and American Holocausts is "an inflam- matory toying with human fears," and British euthanasiast Glanville Williams calls such comparisons "ridiculous fantasies" and says that "No proposal for reform, however strong the argument in its favor, is immune from the 'wedge' objection [the 'slippery slope']."
It is obvious that a spurious or truly ridiculous comparison would not receive the dignity or effort of a logical reply. However, if well- known pro-abortionists feel driven to answer the Holocaust/ abortion analogy with such vehemence, we have some indication that the analogy is at least partially true, or they wouldn't feel threatened by it.
Pro-abortionists will scoff, of course, but psychologists know that the most vicious reactions occur to a statement that comes uncomfortably close to some secret that a person (or, in this case, persons) want hidden or obscured.
Abortion pushers passionately loathe the "American Holocaust" analogy precisely because it is so fitting and because it hits so very close to home.
Pro-abortion propagandists are very disturbed about this comparison, and for good reason -- their thin veil of privacy will be ripped away if the public sees the pervasive parallels between themselves and the Nazis, and so they attack the comparison with incredibly vehemence.
The 'abortion mentality' might just as well be called the 'eugenics mentality;' we, not God, determine who will be born into this (or who will remain here). This mindset cuts across all borders and issues; it can be applied to birth control, abortion, sterilization, euthanasia, and even genocide!
A Detailed Example of Overreaction. It is very important for pro-life debaters to know exactly why pro-aborts object so strenuously to the Holocaust comparison. If pro-abort 'logic' can be effectively debunked, the pro-lifer can show just how Nazi-like the thinking of the anti-lifers really is in the process.
The 1990 National Organization for Women fundraising comic book "Choices" very neatly encapsulated all of the pro-abortion objections to the "American Holocaust" comparison in a two-page piece entitled "Donahue."
It seems amusing that pro-abortionists constantly push their propaganda in comic book form; perhaps they realize that the only people who will believe their swill are those who operate with a comic- book and bumper-sticker mentality.
In this story, a woman quotes a Catholic man (with a classic stern, staring, White 'Big Brother' face), a guest on the "Donahue" television talk show. Her rebuttal to his statements follows, with editorial replies to her rhetorical questions added in brackets.
ANALYSIS OF THE "CHOICES" OBJECTION
TO THE AMERICAN HOLOCAUST ANALOGY
"Hitler had a conscience, he [the "Donahue" guest] said. Hitler made a conscious decision to kill Jews. If Hitler had a Christian conscience, he said, it wouldn't have happened. This guy kept calling a woman's choice the "Abortion Holocaust." This pisses me off!
"I mean, does this guy really think that a woman's right to decide for herself can be equated with ovens and gas chambers and medical experi- ments?" [The unborn are indeed incinerated in specially-made Austrian ovens after they are killed. Late-term babies are also the subjects of ghastly medical experiments, as described in Chapter 73, "Fetal Experimentation"].
(And of course we all know, from other files in this series, that the CORE ISSUE is NOT a "women's right to choose", that just for propoganda purposes -- since a woman still has the right to "choose" not to get pregnant in the first place by using contraceptives, etc. The REAL motivation behind "aboration" is the Aryan agenda of "racial cleansing" of the Blacks, Jews, Hispanics and other racial 'stocks' that are not considered to be of the 'Aryan' ideal -- according to PLANNED PARENTHOOD eugenicists like Margaret Sanger and her sponsors. Abortion serves as ONE of several methods to bring this to pass, and a damn 'profitable' one at that since the abortion doctors are 'making a killing' off of their 'business'. - Wol.)
"Can he actually compare getting on a bus to go to a clinic with being herded onto trains like cattle (worse than cattle), and being delivered into the gates of hell, gates with names like Auschwitz, Dachau, Bergen-Belsen, Treblinka?" [Women are herded into clinics by escorts, rushed through assembly-line abortions, and hustled out the door as soon as they can stagger a few steps. No time to think it over, no other options, no informed consent. And the clinics, by whatever name, are the gates to the tortures of Hell for their unborn children].
"Does he really believe that going through an elective ambulatory procedure is the same as being strapped down on a table and having your ovaries irradiated and then removed, without consent, without anesthesia?" [Unborn babies -- and now, even newborn anencephalic babies -- do indeed often have their organs removed without consent and without anesthesia, just as described in Chapter 73 , "Fetal Experimentation"].
"Jesus Christ! And that's the only Christian thing I can say about it! How dare he equate the suffering of millions upon millions (and not only Jews) which was thrust upon them by a madman and his murdering hordes, with a conscience, Christian or otherwise ... with personal choice?" [Call it anything you want, but the only difference is this: Instead of having black-garbed SS troops oversee the execution of millions, now the victim's own mothers willingly carry them to the slaughter -- all in the name of 'freedom of choice!']
(Also, don't forget the NAZI connections to the eugenics-abortion movement, as has been well documented elsewhere in these files. - Wol.)
The final panel shows the woman, with a determined look on her face vividly reminiscent of a Red Chinese propaganda poster, volunteering for "Clinic Defense," as she gallantly thinks, " I'm insulted. No, it's worse. I'm disgusted. As a Jew ... and as a woman." [We pro-lifers are disgusted, too -- and that is why we so adamantly oppose this slaughter of the in- nocents]!
In summary, the only difference between the Nazi and American Holocausts is that the ability to make the decision to kill has been delegated from the Nazi death camp ( Vernichtungslager ) doctors to individual women. The main event -- the killing -- still takes place.
In fact, it may be said that the American Holocaust is far worse than the Nazi Holocaust, not only in sheer numbers of deaths, but in the fact that tens of millions of women have had their consciences deadened to the point that they want to abort their children for convenience. At least in the Nazi Holocaust, only a few tens of thousands of men and women without consciences did the killing.
The Responses. Notice the tone of the above pro-abortion tirades. These explosions of incandescent rhetoric illustrate the only two possible pro-abortion responses to the Holocaust comparison;
(1) Gordon simply states his opinion; as always, there are no attempts to refute, only to condemn , the Holocaust comparison.
(2) the "Choices" comic-book writer merely asks a long line of rhetorical questions for the purpose of obscuring the comparison.
Notice also that both writers puff up like fat toads with sheer indignity and bitterness. This is all the pro-abortionists can do. After all, it is virtually impossible to disprove such a complex analogy. It is much easier to obscure it with the diversion provided by an explosion of indignant words.
Pro-lifers have an easy task with the Holocaust parallel; all we have to do is highlight just a few of the many parallels between the original and current Holocausts to get our points across. It is up to the pro-aborts to disprove the analogy, which of course is impossible...
The Dangers of the Slippery Slope.
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- forever!"
-- George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four .
Introduction. Perhaps the one aspect of the new and old Holocausts that disturbs pro-abortionists the most is pro-life insistence upon the existence of the looming "slippery slope."
If the public finally realizes that abortion inevitably leads to euthanasia (and therefore poses a direct and clear threat to them ), the anti-life agenda will be exposed. The pro-abortionists know that the spurious "right to privacy" on a national scale is the only thing that can preserve their "progress" down the slippery slope. They will do anything to maintain this strategic veil of secrecy.
Incrementalism is the Key. The Nazis skidded down the "slippery slope" with incredible speed, traversing the complete range from eugenic sterilization to genocide in only nine years. They violated the principle of incrementalism (gradualism), which states that social change must occur at a rate that is virtually unnoticeable to the public. If change pro- ceeds too quickly or in steps that are too large, the movement will be vigorously opposed. We 'modern' people are following the same road, albeit at a more careful and leisurely pace. We are paying attention to the principle of incrementalism.
After reviewing the medical war crimes trials at Nuremberg, the World Medical Association (WMA) adopted the Declaration of Geneva in 1948. This document read, in part; "I will maintain the utmost respect for human life, from the time of CONCEPTION; even under threat, I will not use my medical knowledge contrary to the laws of humanity."[10]
With Nazi atrocities still vividly in mind, researchers and physicians generally held to the Declaration of Geneva, and to the more comprehensive Hippocratic Oath, for about two decades after World War II concluded.
The Wall is Doomed. But then cracks began to appear in the armor of the physician's regard for human life. Once again, the eugenicist/utilitarian mindset began to appear in isolated instances. And, as we all know after being taught the lesson twice, after the first crack appears, the wall is doomed.
Two famous physicians/researchers injected live cancer cells into elderly patients at Brooklyn's Jewish Hospital and Medical Center in the mid-1960s. In the first publicized case of infanticide, doctors at Johns Hopkins Medical Center allowed a baby boy with Down Syndrome to starve to death in 1971.[11]
Soon thereafter, the United States Supreme Court bestowed upon us abortion on demand THROUGHLUT the entire nine months of pregnancy. In 1983, Baby Doe of Bloomington, Indiana was starved to death. Although an estimated 2,000 infanticides had been occurring in this country every year, what made this case significant was that it was the first court- sanctioned instance of euthanasia in this country (for further information on the history of the euthanasia movement in the United States, see Chapter 110 in Volume III).
It was not long before late-term aborted babies became prey to experi- mentation WHILE they were still alive and feeling pain, as condoned by two leading medical researchers; "Since we know we are going to destroy, dis- member and discard the fetus in a procedure known as abortion, it seems a small indignity to expose it to rubella vaccine just prior to that termination. The medical ethic 'do no harm' would, of course, be violated -- but we have already violated that principle when we accepted the concept of abortion. The ultimate harm of destroying the fetus trivializes that which precedes it." [12]
Compare this statement to the one made by Nazi Dr. Julius Hallervorden, quoted at the Nuremberg trials in 1945: "If you are going to kill all these people, at least take the brains out so that the material may be utilized." [13]
The Similarities Between the Nazi
and American Holocausts.
"Nazism is merely applied biology."
-- Rudolf Hess.[14]
Introduction. The proof (or rebuttal) of any comparison is found primarily not in the differences between two or more entities or ideas, but in the similarities .
The similarities between the Nazi and American Holocausts are simply too profound and numerous to ignore. They include;
(1) the identical country of origin;
(2) the identical pervasive use of propaganda and deceptive language (Newspeak);
(3) the identical justification of the atrocities;
(4) early medical leadership of the Holocausts;
(5) dehumanization of the victims; and
(6) the identical anti-life, Hegelian philosophy of those in power.
These similarities are not trivial or 'fringe' in nature; they address the very heart of the matter. The philosophies and the methods employed by both the Nazis and the pro-abortionists are identical!
These similarities are discussed in the following paragraphs.
Similarity (1): Country of Origin.
The United States Leads the Way. It may be almost incomprehensible to the close-minded and those who would like to avoid shame by rewriting history, but the philosophy of the Nazi eugenics movement was not framed and nourished in Germany.
It was conceived, developed and nurtured in our own "land of the free" -- the United States!
Statements of the Eugenicists. The proof is in the statements made by leading American eugenicists, racists, and euthanasiasts during the period from the mid-1920s to the mid-1930s, when their movements flourished.
Several years before the Third Reich was founded (i.e., in the mid- 1920s), Hitler and his cronies were avid readers of American eugenicists, including especially the pathologically anti-Semitic Madison Grant.
Grant argued that "sentimental beliefs" (such as Christianity) short- circuited the practice of infanticide, which he saw as a natural weeding- out process necessary to the preservation of the species. [15]
Grant and Dr. Lothrop Stoddard exerted great influence "... in awakening in Germany ... the movement for the preservation and increase of the Nordic race." Stoddard asserted that compulsory sterilization of the "unfit" was a "gift" from the American eugenics movement.
It is interesting that the masthead slogan of the Birth Control Review was "Creating a Race of Thoroughbreds." In 1933, the magazine featured an article entitled "Eugenic Sterilization: An Urgent Need," authored by Adolf Hitler's Director of Genetic Sterilization and founder of the Nazi Society for Racial Hygiene -- Ernst Rudin!
Lothrop Stoddard sat on the board of the American Birth Control League (later Planned Parenthood) in the 1930s. The Birth Control Review enthusiastically endorsed his book The Rising Tide of Color Against White World-Supremacy . In this book (introduced by fellow racist/eugenicist Madison Grant), Stoddard demonstrates beyond a shadow of reasonable doubt the intimate connections between abortion, eugenics and goal-oriented racism, both in the Nazi regime and in latter-day America;[16]
"... upon the quality of human life all else depends ... none of the colored races shows perceptible signs of declining birth-rate, all tending to breed up to the limits of available subsistence ... It can mean only one thing: a tremendous and steadily augmenting outward thrust of surplus colored men from overcrowded colored homelands ... But many of these relatively empty [Northern] lands have been definitely set aside by the white man as his own special heritage ...
"His ["colored" man's] outstanding quality is superabundant animal vitality. In this he easily surpasses all other races. To it he owes his intense emotional- ism. To it, again, is due his extreme fecundity, the negro being the quickest of breeders. This abounding vitality shows in many other ways, such as the negro's ability to survive harsh conditions of slavery under which other races have soon succumbed ... black blood, once entering a human stock, seems never really bred out again ...
"White men cannot, under peril of their vary race-existence, allow whole- sale Asian immigration into white race-areas ... The grim truth of the matter is this: The whole white race is exposed, immediately or ultimately, to the pos- sibility of social sterilization and final replacement or absorption by the teeming colored races.
"And, of course, the more primitive a type is, the more prepotent it is. This is why crossings with the negro are uniformly fatal. Whites, Amerindians, or Asiatics -- all are alike vanquished by the invincible prepotency of the more primitive, generalized, and lower negro blood.
" ... whether we consider interwhite migrations or colored encroachments on white lands, the net result is an expansion of lower and a contraction of higher stocks, the process being thus a disgenic one.
"For race-betterment is such an intensely practical matter! When peoples come to realize that the quality of the population is the source of all their prosperity, progress, security, and even existence; we shall see much-abused "eugenics" actually moulding social programmes and political policies ... we or the next generation will take in hand the problem of race-depreciation, and segregation of defectives and abolition of handicaps penalizing the better stocks will put an end to our present racial decline."
Notice how, near the end of the second paragraph, Stoddard lets slip that he does not consider Blacks to be human. Does this sound familiar? Remember that Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood, heartily approved of the book's contents.
Notice also how Stoddard waxes prophetic in the last paragraph. His prophecy, unfortunately, has turned to fact. It is our benighted generation that has taken up the task of "abolishing handicaps" and dealing with "race-depreciation" by employing the devastatingly effective weapon of racially-directed abortion.
H.L. Mencken, another leading American eugenicist, urged that "A resolute attack be made on the fecundity of all the males on the lowest rung of the social ladder."[17]
Yet another American eugenicist demanded that Hitler be "... made an honorary member of the [American] Eugenics Record Office."[18]
James Davenport grumbled that "Our ancestors drove Baptists from Massachusetts Bay into Rhode Island, but we have no place to drive the Jews to. Also, they burned the witches, but it seems to be against the mores to burn any considerable part of our population." [15]
The Courts Go Along. With so many leading American thinkers advocating such a fashionable, utilitarian, and 'socially beneficial' course of action, is it any surprise that their depraved fantasies were placed into concrete action, despite Constitutional safeguards?
The United States court system bestowed its imprimatur upon eugenics in 1927, when Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote the majority opinion in the Court's Buck v. Bell decision upholding the enforced eugenic sterilization of poor Black women. Holmes held that; "We have seen more than once that the public welfare may call upon the best citizens for their lives. It would be strange if it could not call upon those who already sap the strength of the State for these lesser sacrifices ... Three generations of imbeciles are enough."[19]
This eugenic sterilization law was reversed by the Supreme Court only as recently as 1972. But the damage had been done. Following the lead of the Supreme Court, thirty states had enacted laws that mandated sterilization for the poor by 1933.[14]
These laws followed the Model Eugenical Sterilization Law, promulgated by Harry H. Laughlin, director of the Eugenics Record Office. They called for the sterilization of criminals, mental patients, the retarded, the blind, deaf, diseased, and alcoholics, and for dependents upon society -- the homeless, orphans, and tramps.[15]
From 1924 to the early 1970s, more than 7,500 poor men and women were FORCIBLY sterilized in the State of Virginia alone. Of course, these operations were performed in approved "mental health facilities" on "unwed mothers, prostitutes, petty criminals and children with disciplinary problems." [15]
Other laws drafted by American eugenicists mandated segregation of those with birth defects and mental disabilities in state-run institutions. No inmate ever left these places with their reproductive organs intact -- they were all neutered like stray dogs. In some states, all of those inmates who carried hereditary disabilities were sterilized. Other state regulations mandated contraceptive use by all whose family history indicated a predisposition towards serious hereditary defects.[20]
Resurrection of the Horror. A person with common sense might think that this type of thinking would die out after the eugenics-driven horrors of World War II. Unfortunately, those who long for a better world right now always desire it at the expense of those they consider inferior to themselves, as shown by the quotes in Figure 53-1.