GUEST OPINION: Is abortion killing for social control?

Published: Saturday, October 23, 2010

By Barb Yagley

The coming election Nov. 2 has been called a referendum on government expansionism but it is also an opportunity to reject a pervasive, eugenics philosophy as articulated by Supreme Court Justice Ruth Ginsburg.

In a 2009 New York Times interview, she said, “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.” Eugenics justifies killing unwanted, burdensome human beings to solve social problems.

Eugenics fell out of favor after it ran amok in Nazi Germany, but the American version continued well into the 1960s with policies of forced sterilizations of poor or minority women. As forced sterilizations became more politically incorrect, abortion and subsidized “reproductive health care” became the favored tools for population control of undesirables. Because the same groups that provide “reproductive care” also provide abortions (e.g. Planned Parenthood), the abortion rate for minorities has sky-rocketed since the Supreme Court legalized it.

In Michigan, almost half of all abortions are performed on non-white women. An excellent documentary, “Maafa 21,” exposes the efforts of the abortion rights movement and its allies in government to legalize abortion and then facilitate its use as a population control tool of undesirables. The interested reader can find “Maafa 21” in segments on YouTube. Especially noteworthy is segment 9 ( which shows the abortion-promoting activities of high government officials from both political parties during the late 1960s and early 1970s.

Today’s moderate Republicans and progressive Democrats are successors to those elites. No one would admit to being a eugenicist; the voter needs to look at the voting records of “progressives” and “moderates” to find truth.

The “progressives” aggressively promote abortion at home and abroad. While moderate Republicans support abortion quietly; the moderate Democrat tries to limit it. An example of each type of moderate is Michael Castle (R-DE) and Dan Lipinski (D-IL). On two pieces of legislation to fund abortions in minority-dominant D.C. and fund No. 1 abortion provider Planned Parenthood, Republican Castle voted Yes. Democrat Lipinski voted No.

To the pro-life voter, a moderate Democrat is preferred over a moderate Republican.

If you do not want your hard-earned tax dollars to fund abortion here or used to promote it abroad and if you believe that killing human beings solves no social problems, then carefully choose for whom you vote. Check out and click on Personalized Ballot for pro-life recommendations.

Barb Yagley of Troy is president of the Central Oakland Right to Life and a post-abortive woman. Contact her at