Study after study shows that sex education doesn’t do what its proponents say it will do.  They say it will reduce teenage pregnancy, but it doesn’t.  Here is the latest study from the UK.

Sex education has little impact on teen pregnancy as figures have remained unchanged over last 40 years

Family campaigners have long argued that some lessons are at risk of encouraging youngsters to experiment sexually.

The academic examined the teenage pregnancy statistics between 1969 and 2009 and discovered that they have remained ‘almost exactly the same’.

In 1969, there were 6.9 pregnancies per 1,000 girls aged 13 to 15-year-olds. By 1979, they had risen to 7.5 per 1,000, the same figure as in 2009, according to the paper published in the latest issue of the Education and Health journal.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2193127/Sex-education-little-impact-teen-pregnancy-figures-remained-unchanged-40-years.html#ixzz24h5zD6kE

Why do they keep sex education? Because it lowers the overall birthrate and separates sex from procreation and the consummation of marriage.  Sex used to be something special between husband and wife to consummate their marriage and show their love for each other. Now it is seen only as act of pleasure. This is why the West is dying.

I believe the primary reason why Obama was promoted by the elites to become the first black president is that he is an eugenicist. He provides great black cover to those that want to exterminate the black race. He repaid his supporters with the first official act by lifting the federal restrictions on funding abortion.

Obama lifts restrictions on abortion funding

Obama is  the perfect black cover for the Eugenics movement. Blacks will never turn against the first black President, no matter what he does. Now he wants to provide free sterilizations without parental consent to children.

Obamacare Begins Child Sterilization, Without Parental Consent

With back-to-school season in full swing across the nation, parents in Oregon have more to worry about than shopping for sweaters and purchasing pencils. In the state of Oregon, the Obamacare mandate, which went into effect on August 1, 2012, provides free sterilizations to girls as young as fifteen. Now, your daughter, your high school freshman, can choose, without your consent, to be permanently sterilized.

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) – Forget the milestones of obtaining a driver’s license at 16 and being able to legally drink at 21 – getting sterilized at 15 is now the first step in the social maturity process of an American youth.

Read the whole article

Obama Calls Some Pregnancy a Tragedy

Posted: August 24, 2012 in Abortion, Genocide
Tags:

OBAMA: “I am pro-choice. I believe that women make responsible choices and they know better than anybody the tragedy of a difficult pregnancy and I don’t think that it’s the government’s role to meddle in that choice.”

 

No pregnancy is tragedy! Every pregnancy is a gift from God.

This is a great article on how the Protestant Chuches changed their opinions on birth control. Birth control was once universally believed by all Christians to be a sin. Now only the Catholic Churches teaches that birth control is a mortal sin.

The Protestant Reformation was in significant part a protest against the perceived antinatalism of the late Medieval Christian Church. It was a celebration of procreation that also saw contraception and abortion as among the most wicked of human sins, as direct affronts to the ordinances of God. This background makes the Protestant “sellout” on contraception in the mid 20th Century all the more surprising, and disturbing.

As the Augustinian monk, theologian, and “first Protestant” Martin Luther viewed his world in the second decade of the 16th Century, he saw a Christianity in conflict with family life and fertility. Church tradition held that the taking of vows of chastity—as a priest, monk, or cloistered sister—was spiritually superior to the wedded life. In consequence, about one-third of adult European Christians were in Holy Orders.

read complete article

Read the first 4 chapters free here

In 1974 the National Security Council completed a study called Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for U.S. Security and Overseas Interests (NSSM 20) that called the growing population in the third world as a threat to our national security and that measures should be taken to reduce their populations.[1] The surprisingly blunt memo even describes the cover story to be used to assuage any concerns that the native populations might have about population control:

The U.S. can help to minimize charges of an imperialist motivation behind its support of population activities by repeatedly asserting that such support derives from a concern with:

(a) the right of the individual couple to determine freely and responsibly their number and spacing of children and to have information, education, and the means to do so; and

(b) the fundamental social and economic development of poor countries in which rapid population growth is both a contributing cause and a consequence of widespread poverty.[2]

As amazing as this seems, the Orwellian “We are killing you for your own good” or “It’s all about choice and freedom” lines, actually work. People are ignorant or refuse to believe that the elites are engaged in an organized plot to kill most of the human race. Of course it is not about choice and freedom. They wouldn’t be happy if every family in the third world freely choose to have ten kids. In 1974 Robert McNamara, former secretary of defense and president of the World Bank, went, as far as to say that only thermonuclear war is a greater threat to the world than population growth.[3]


[1] Seamus Grimes, “The Ideology of Population Control in the UN Draft Plan for Cairo,” Population Research and Policy Review 13, no. 3 (September 1994), 213.

[2] National Security Study Memorandum 200

[3] Stephen D. Mumford, “Abortion: A National Security Issue,” The Humanist (September/October 1982)

Read the first 4 chapters here..

Planned Parenthood knew blacks would be suspicious if a bunch of white people who never had much to do with blacks, all of sudden, took a keen interest in blacks and went around telling them, “Stop having so many children. Use birth control. Get sterilized. Have abortions. It is for your own good.” No, that wouldn’t work. They needed black front men. A front man or organization looks to the public like it is serving one purpose but it in actuality serves a hidden ulterior purpose. The most commonly known fronts are front companies used by organized crime to launder money. Planned Parenthood recruited among black America’s opinion molders (intellectuals, ministers, and politicians) to find front men.

They had their first great successes in getting front men from black America’s intelligentsia. It is not surprising that intellectuals would find the elitist message of eugenics appealing. Remember, eugenicists do not discriminate by race, but by genetics. Because of their focus on genetics rather than on race, they have been called scientific racists. Just as it was possible for Margaret Sanger to despise most whites and want to see them exterminated, it is just as possible for a black person to despise most of his fellow blacks and want them eliminated. So it is not hard to understand how members of the black elite, particularly intellectuals who are naturally are aware of their intellectual superiority to the general population, could believe in eugenics. With black intellectuals Sanger was more honest and confided in them with her eugenic vision. They were told that were part of the genetically superior race of human beings and that majority of blacks as well as whites were “human waste” that needed to be eliminated. Black intellectuals were just as attracted to the ideas of eugenics as whites and became some of its most ardent supporters.

Planned Parenthood hit pay dirt in June 1932 when they were able to lure some of black America’s leading intellectuals to their side. George S. Schuyler, a columnist and author; Charles S. Johnson, president of Fisk University; Elmer A. Carter, editor of the Urban League’s journal Opportunity; and W. E. B. Du Bois, the first black man to get a Harvard PHD, all agreed to lend their names to Planned Parenthood’s Negro Project. They all wrote pro-birth control articles in Planned Parenthood’s flagship publication, at that time, the Birth Control Review. W. E. B. Du Bois was the prize catch, because as editor of the NAACP’s flagship publication the Crisis, he was arguably black America’s most famous and public figure at the time. Today, many schools are named after him and Harvard University founded the W. E. B. Du Bois Institute in his honor.

The Birth Control Review is an academic publication that would not be read by the masses or the working classes. It is clear from the articles that their goal is to convince the black intellectual classes that birth control should be promoted to the black underclass. The hope is that the intellectuals would write articles and give lectures on the usefulness and necessity of birth control. The idea would spread down from the intellectual class to the middle class to the lower class. This is one technique to change a target group’s opinions and attitudes.

With articles entitled “Quantity or Quality” or “Eugenics for the Negro” these men did not hide their elitist attitudes and disdain for the majority of blacks in the pieces they wrote. By reading their words, one can gain insight into the mind of a black scientific racist and understand why blacks would help a movement that appears to be contrary to their community’s and their own self-interest. George Schuyler says that a woman is nothing but “a child factory, as a cow is a milk factory and a hen an egg factory.” He also states that there are “certain ingredients” that are necessary to produce a healthy child and that if these are missing then the “child will usually be an inferior product.”[1] Human beings are nothing but products! It is unbelievable the callous disregard these people have for human life. W. E. B. Du Bois wanted blacks to “learn that among human races and groups, as among vegetables, quality and not mere quantity counts.”[2] Elmer A. Carter was worried that the wrong blacks are having too many children, “Therein lies the danger, for Negroes who by virtue of their education and capacity are best able to rear children shrink from that responsibility and the Negro who, in addition to the handicaps of race and color, is shackled by mental and social incompetence serenely goes on his way bringing into the world children.”[3] Du Bois also shared the sentiment the wrong kind of blacks were having children, “the mass of ignorant Negroes still breed carelessly and disastrously, so that the increase among Negroes, even more than among whites, is from that part of the population least intelligent and fit.”[4] What you have read is how the black elites, who ally themselves with white eugenicist organizations, truly think of the black masses.

They also paint an extremely grim and pessimistic picture of life that doesn’t seem to fit the reality. Only seventy years ago blacks lived as slaves; in 1932 they lived as freemen and were on the verge on gaining more of their constitutional rights. I think most people would see this as a hopeful situation. Of course, Du Bois and his friends are not concerned with painting an accurate picture of life or providing blacks with encouragement and hope. Their goal is to convince the blacks that are “shackled by mental and social incompetence,” so it is better not to have any children. Schuyler seems to think that only morticians and prison wardens benefit from more black children, because that is where they are bound to end up. He wonders, “Why should the Negroes . . .  continue to enrich the morticians and choke the jails with unwanted children?”[5] He also implores women to reject their innate maternal instincts and not have children, because “every child takes a great deal of vitality from even those mothers who are in the best of health”[6]

Read the articles

[1] George S. Schulyer, “Quantity or Quality,” Birth Control Review (June 1936): 165–66.

[2] Du Bois, “Black Folk and Birth Control,” 166–67.

[3] Elmer A. Carter, “Eugenics for the Negro,” Birth Control Review (June 1936): 169–70.

[4] Du Bois, “Black Folk and Birth Control,” 166–67.

[5] Schulyer, “Quantity or Quality,” 165–66.

[6] Ibid.