Defending Black People from Other Black People Bent on Black Genocide

I don’t get it. Black people are not only agreeing with the KKK and Nazis on their views of race but defending them publicly. It’s been almost 150 years since Lincoln freed the slaves and they still don’t want to leave the plantation. In fact, they are defending the proposition that some men have the right to decide who should live or not live. The strong unilaterally deciding the fate of the weak. Oh, and to them, I’m the racist for pointing it out.
Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

I could start this blog in many ways, but I know that I won’t move the needle in this arena for most people. Sadly, folks would rather deal with feelings than facts. I’ve known the deck was stacked against truth and reason, but that belief was reinforced on my recent trip to Washington D.C.

I paid a visit to the recently opened museum on African American History. Black folks have had many accomplishments in this country, but I think the narrative is muddled and missing direction. Christianity was missing in places it should have been front and center, but then that’s the trick isn’t it? If black folks were following Christ, then they wouldn’t be agreeing with the KKK and defending the Klan’s philosophy as right.

I also visited the Martin Luther King Memorial and that too was missing something; namely, the endpoint of the racial struggle was missing. The “I Have a Dream” speech was not there. It should have been the cornerstone for all races to strive for the ideal King annunciated when he said, “I have a dream that my four little chi1dren will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” The goal of the civil rights movement as defined by King was a colorblind society where everyone was looked at as a child of God and we were all evaluated by who we are on the inside not the outside.

King, as a good Republican, knew that the group needed opportunity, but it was the individual that would then be able to stand or fall on his merits. However, those claiming to be successors of King, flipped this idea on its head and embraced a system of never-ending dependency where they just happened to be the leaders. Many of these “leaders” claim to be clergymen but their gospel is not based on biblical truths but Marxism, propaganda from the Klan, Liberation Theology, and other assorted nonsense that tickles the ears of listeners.

Blacks want the Right to Kill Each Other

This false teaching is currently on display all over the Internet and your evening news. Black people are demanding the right to kill other black people without repercussions. Why because black people are stupid and poor and need to be controlled. Not my words, but theirs.

Here are just a few examples.

Ohio Rep. Janine Boyd – D

A female Democrat state representative from Ohio, Rep. Janine Boyd, drafted an amendment last week seeking to have black babies exempted from pro-life legislation dubbed the “heartbeat bill,” which bars babies with detectable heartbeats (around six weeks gestation) from being killed via abortion.

As reported by LifeNews, Boyd’s bill “would have given an exemption to African American women to abort their unborn babies for any reason up to the state’s current abortion limit, 20 weeks.” . . .

“Black slaves were once treated like cattle and put out to stud in order to create generations of more slaves,” argued the Democrat. “Our country is not far enough beyond our history to legislate as if it is.” . . .

Former Planned Parenthood executive turned pro-life advocate Abby Johnson ripped Boyd’s targeted amendment, snarking that “apparently a 38% national abortion rate in the African-American community isn’t enough.”

Ohio Democrat Drafts Amendment Seeking to Make Black Babies Exempt From Pro-Life Law
Leslie Dracarys Jones

She then continued. “You can’t control women because, I don’t know if y’all heard, but women are the same as humans. And I’m Leslie Dracarys Jones. “Why do all of these weird ass men care what women choose to do with their bodies? I don’t care what you do with your 65-year-old droopy a— b—s.”

“When women have a choice, women have freedom,” Jones exclaimed to huge applause.

“The fact that nine states are doing this means this really is a war on women,” Jones said in conclusion. “You can’t tell me what to do with my body.”

Leslie Jones rips Alabama abortion law on ‘SNL’: ‘You can’t tell me what to do with my body’
Rapper Offset

Rapper Offset of the group Migos has slammed Alabama’s controversial abortion law, comparing it to slavery.

The rapper unloaded on Twitter on Saturday evening, criticizing Alabama’s law, which outlaws abortion at any stage and does not allow an exemption for victims of rape or incest. Abortion will only be permitted in the state should the pregnancy pose a life-threatening health risk to the mother, should it become enforced in 2020.

Rapper Offset likens Alabama abortion law to slavery, says he’s not proud to be an American

There’s more examples and we’ll get to another shortly. But first a look at how this situation came to be.

Vocabulary: Malthusian

In his magnum opus, An Essay on the Principle of Population, published in six editions from 1798 to 1826, Malthus wrote:

“All children born, beyond what would be required to keep up the population to a desired level, must necessarily perish, unless room be made for them by the deaths of grown persons. . . . Therefore … we should facilitate, instead of foolishly and vainly endeavoring to impede, the operations of nature in producing this mortality; and if we dread the too frequent visitation of the horrid form of famine, we· should sedulously encourage the other forms of destruction, which we compel nature to use. Instead of recommending cleanliness to the poor, we should encourage contrary habits. In our towns we should make the streets narrower, crowd more people into the houses, and court the return of the plague. In the country, we should build our villages near stagnant pools, and particularly encourage settlements in all marshy and unwholesome situations. But above all, we should reprobate specific remedies for ravaging diseases; and restrain those benevolent, but much mistaken men, who have thought they were doing a service to mankind by projecting schemes for the total extirpation of particular disorders.

Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood p 55-56

Thomas Malthus 1766 – 1834

Vocabulary: Eugenics

Eugenics the study and control of procreation as a means of improving hereditary characteristics of future generations. The concept has sometimes been used in a pseudoscientific way as an excuse for unethical, racist, or even genocidal practices such as involuntary sterilization or certain other practices in Nazi Germany and elsewhere.

Malthusian beliefs coupled with Darwin’s “survival of the fittest” allowed racists the world over to claim a scientific basis for the superiority of one group over another. This fueled calls for eugenics programs; euthanasia, abortion, infanticide, forced sterilization, genocide, and other atrocities. Margaret Sanger–who you are about to meet–was a leading voice in Europe and the United States for these ideals. Her beliefs overthrew the morality of her day and replaced it with one of convenience and death. A belief system which is thriving to this day.

Margaret Sanger racist architect of Planned Parenthood

Margaret Sanger: Architect of American Eugenics

OK, so where did black folks get the idea to kill other black folks? Why, from a white lady named Margaret Sanger and her merry band from the Birth Control League. Sanger has a long history of such rhetorical gems as these:

“More children from the fit, less from the unfit that is the chief issue of birth control.”

“the most merciful thing a large family can do to one of its infant members is to kill it.”

“We should hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. We don’t want the word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population. And the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

For those of you that went to public school or are lifelong members of the Democrat Party, here’s some info you may not have heard.

Margaret Sanger had learned of eugenics from Havelock Ellis. She first acknowledged the place of birth control in the eugenicists’ program when she announced in 1919: “More children from the fit, less from the unfit that is the chief issue of birth control.” Mrs. Sanger usually used the word “unfit” to refer to the mentally retarded and physically deformed. “Birth control,” she said in 1920, “is nothing more or less than the facilitation of the process of weeding out the unfit, or preventing the birth of defectives or of those who will become defectives.” Increasingly, she saw feeblemindedness, the bogey of all the hereditarians, as antecedent to poverty or social organization in the genesis of social problems. “The philosophy of birth control,” she said in 1922, “points out that as long as civilized communities encourage unrestrained fecundity in the “normal” members of the population—always of course under the guise of decency and morality—and penalize every attempt to introduce the principle of discrimination and responsibility in parenthood, they will be faced with the ever-increasing problem of feeblemindedness, that fertile parent of degeneracy, crime, and pauperism.

Margaret Sanger and others considered the most menacing aspect of proliferating unfitness to be the growth of the custodial welfare state. “Protective and paternalistic laws,” said a speaker at the Sixth International Neo-Malthusian and Birth Control Conference in 1925, benefited “the least desirable elements of society.” Such laws, he said, “are usually put forward upon moral or humane or altruistic grounds and in nearly all cases by professional agitators and stupid busybodies… What they actually accomplish is the preservation of the misfit, the degenerate, the low, the unworthy and the more or less defective elements at the expense of the strong and exceptional.” If practiced by the right people, he suggested, birth control could wipe out those evils for which welfare legislation gave at best merely symptomatic relief.

That Spencerian attitude, embracing the familiar tenets of individualism, elitism, and antistatism, provided one base for the eugenics program. In 1922 Mrs. Sanger registered her acceptance of such ideas when she said that if society applied to reproduction the techniques of efficiency employed by “modern stockbreeders,” there would be no need for measures that were “fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good.

Birth Control in America by David M. Kennedy p 115-117

By 1920 eugenicists were specifically advocating the adoption of birth control by the slumdwellers and impoverished, who had always been Margaret Sanger’s chief concern.

Kennedy p 118

Because of her Malthusian and Eugenic connections, she had become closely associated with the scientists and theorists who put together Nazi Germany’s “race purification” program. She had openly endorsed the euthanasia, sterilization, abortion, and infanticide programs of the early Reich. She published a number of articles in the Birth Control Review that mirrored Hitler’s Aryan-White Supremacist rhetoric. She even commissioned Dr. Ernst Rudin, the director of the Nazi Medical Experimentation program, to write for The Review himself.

Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood p 61

Early on, Planned Parenthood adopted a similar strategy against the church. Margaret Sanger recognized that the church was “the enemy” of her crusade. But she also recognized that· an all-out frontal assault on God’s People was suicidal. And so she put together a “Balak strategy.” She relied on wolves in sheep’s clothing (2 Timothy 3:6).

Margaret began by wooing young and ambitious ministers with the trinkets and baubles of power, prestige, privilege, and position. She doted on them, feeding their sense of self-importance. She enticed them with honors. She invited them to sit on her boards. She patronized their pet projects. She wined them and dined them. She rewarded them with trips, junkets, and tours. She knew just how to tantalize them with attention and appreciation. Her winsomeness was irresistible and her thoroughness was incomparable.

But even without all that alluring charm, Margaret’s campaign to seduce Christians would probably have won support in three broad sectors of the church.

Especially during the Great Depression when tensions were high and jobs were scarce, racists saw Margaret’s Eugenic plans and programs as an open opportunity to eliminate whole “undesired” races and “dysgenic” classes. Tragically many of them carried out their vendetta in the name of Christ.

Lettie Perkins grew up in a small sharecropper’s cabin deep in the heart of rural South Carolina. When she was just a youngster she remembers a countywide tent revival meeting cosponsored by several large all-White Baptist churches and several social service agencies, including Planned Parenthood. “We were all excited,” she said. “The revival was always the social event of the year. And that year was to be the first time Blacks were allowed to attend. We could hardly contain ourselves. Most of the women bought or made new dresses. We got hats and gloves. We really were going to do things right. It was like a debutante’s coming-out for us.”

The pastor of one of the sponsoring churches spent a good deal of his time for nearly a month before the revival making sure that black pastors in the area turned their people out. “I don’t know why we were so naive at the time,” Lettie told me. “It was so obvious that he was setting us up for something.”

Indeed, he was. On the day that the revival was to begin, Planned Parenthood set up several tents. Blacks were herded into them and “counseled” on the “benefits” of sterilization and birth limitation. “We weren’t even allowed to go into the revival meeting itself until we’d listened to their whole spiel,” Lettie said. “And even then, they segregated us off to one side. Like usual.”

Most of the Black families were outraged. The blatantly racist collusion between Planned Parenthood and the all-White churches was shocking to them, even in that day of raw and festering prejudice. “I can still remember my Mamma just shaking with anger and humiliation,” Lettie said. “Our family never went to church again. Not any church, Black or White. Mamma didn’t want to have anything to do with a faith that could sanction things like that.”

But it wasn’t just racists that were attracted to Margaret Sanger’s cause. During the first three decades of this century, the great Modernist-Fundamentalist controversy erupted onto the American church scene. More disruptive than even the eleventh-century Schism or the sixteenth-century Reformation, the controversy forever changed the face of Christianity in this country. In reaction to the Modernists’ emphasis on the “Social Gospel,” most Fundamentalists withdrew from all cultural involvement to focus on “spiritual things.” Meanwhile the Modernists pursued cultural involvement with a vengeance, uncritically embracing every fringe Liberal cause, issue, and organization including Planned Parenthood. Since the conservative Fundamentalists no longer actively opposed them, the Liberals were able to capture the seats of power and influence.

Men who no longer believed the Bible and who were committed to a radical social agenda were easy prey for Margaret. She exploited the Liberal coup brilliantly.

Richard L. Ford was the young idealistic pastor of a large Methodist church on the West Coast during World War II. Already thoroughly infected with Liberalism even then, his congregation sponsored several cooperative programs with Planned Parenthood. ”At the time we were giddy with excitement,” he told me recently. “We felt that we’d been sequestered in a religious ghetto. That we’d been irrelevant for years. Now at last we were doing things that made a difference in the world. Unshackled of every encumbrance-tradition, the Bible, everything-we loyally followed every new fad and fashion.”

A funny thing happened on the way to relevance, however. “I found that I didn’t have answers anymore,” Richard said.

“When people are facing a crisis in their lives they don’t need their pastor to experiment on their souls and minds with whatever the latest pop therapy is. They need answers. When teens are facing a barrage of temptation you just can’t turn them over to Planned Parenthood. That’s like throwing gas on a fire. They need standards. Solid and sure.”

No longer able to provide his congregation with decisive guidance, Richard was left helpless in the face of a rapidly deteriorating moral climate. “There wasn’t any such thing as sin any more for us,” he said. “So, not surprisingly, we began to indulge ourselves. Illegitimate pregnancies skyrocketed. Divorce rates soared. And the worse things got, the more we turned to the very organizations that prompted our demise in the first place. Imagine! Going to Planned Parenthood to solve the teen pregnancy epidemic! That makes about as much sense as going to a pusher to stop drug abuse or to a pimp to stop prostitution. But, that’s exactly what we did.”

Margaret Sanger was able to successfully recruit large numbers of Fundamentalist, Evangelical, Catholic, and Orthodox Christians into her fold as well. Unlike the racists and liberals who were converts of conscience, these men and women were converts of convenience. They were fine, upstanding Christians who opposed Planned Parenthood’s promiscuous sex education programs. They stood firmly against abortion. Until . . .

Charles Boothe is a respected and admired Christian leader. A former pastor and now the chairman of his church’s deacon board, he runs a community-wide youth ministry. From the expression on his face I could tell that he was deeply disturbed when he walked into my office. “Jeanie, my youngest daughter, is pregnant,” he told me. “She’s just seventeen, a senior in high school. What am I going to do? She has her whole life ahead of her. Why this? Why now?”

We briefly talked through the Biblical options: maternity homes, adoption agencies, alternative centers, and marriage to the father. We consoled one another. We wept together. We prayed together. And we talked long into the afternoon. We embraced warmly when he left.

He then promptly took Jeanie to Planned Parenthood and had his grandchild killed.

I was shocked.

Why? Why would he do such a thing? Why would he resort \ to that which he knew was wrong?

“I’ve always been against abortion,” he told me later. “Always. And I still believe that it’s wrong. It’s murder. But … I tell ya. When it’s your own daughter. . . . Well, I just couldn’t see ruining her life by making her go through the humiliation of an illegitimate pregnancy. And besides, our reputation. . my reputation…. Well, I uh … I just…. Well, you know.”

Margaret Sanger’s “Balak Strategy” proved to be a phenomenal success. Enticing Christians to “play the harlot,” she was able to do what no activist or ideologue possibly could: trap and defeat the church (Numbers 25:18).

It would be several decades before Planned Parenthood would be able to consummate its victory and actually sack the citadel of Christian consensus. But that future conquest in the Supreme Court was ensured by the moral defeat wrought by Margaret’s minions in the church.

Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood 219-223

Facts and Truth

So now you know how it came about that black people have embraced the belief that the way to improve the country is to kill as many black people as possible. Meanwhile, their self-appointed leaders spout meaningless phrases like Black Lives Matter…but not really meaning it. As long as some lives have more value than others, none really have any worth.

Oh, that chick from Saturday Night Live quoted above might want to consider the graphic below showing that those old white guys are trying to save poor black babies from being murdered by their own mothers.

Yet another Celebrity Chimes In

Left-wing activist Emily Ratajkowski is making an anti-science argument to justify the murder of unborn black children as a means to lower the prison population.

And I use the term “anti-science” because Ratajkowski’s racist appeal to decrease the black prison population as some kind of public service is purely driven by a sense of supremacism and has nothing to do with facts or statistics.

Emily Ratajkowski wants to abort black babies to reduce prison population

“This week, 25 old white men voted to ban abortion in Alabama even in cases of incest and rape. These men in power are imposing their wills onto the bodies of women in order to uphold the patriarchy and perpetuate the industrial prison complex by presenting women of low income opportunity the right to chose not to reproduce. The states trying to ban abortions have the highest proportions of black women living there. This is about class and race and is a direct attack on the fundamental human rights women in the US deserve and are protected by under Roe v Wade. Our bodies, out choice.”

Without even attempting to conceal or shade or nuance it, Ratajkowski comes right out and says we need to kill unborn black children before they grow up to become black criminals.

What you have here is a white racist making a eugenics argument cloaked in social justice niceties.

We’ll get to the facts and statistics in a moment, but this must first be made clear: Emily Ratajkowski’s argument, her rationale is no different from what we have heard throughout the darkest parts of human history from the KKK, Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger’s hideous sentiments about black Americans, or from the Nazis about any non-Aryan race.

Before we get to the math that exposes Ratajkowski as the godless supremacist she is, for just a moment let’s assume her thinking is correct– that, in the coldest and most clinical terms, her beliefs make sense. Even so, in order to agree with her, you still have to strip every bit of humanity from a monstrous idea comfortable with the murder of children — based solely on their skin color — for crimes they have not yet committed.

And even Ratajkowski knows that not every black child murdered in the womb is destined to grow up to be criminal, but she is still willing to exterminate, to sacrifice innocent black life as a means to stop the others.

But it’s the math that exposes Ratajkowski… The math is damning.

According to the most recent statistics I could find — and I am using Alabama as my example because it just passed the most progressive pro-life laws and just happens to have the highest proportional number of its citizens in prisons — there are some 45,000 Alabama citizens in federal, state, and local prisons.

A majority of those prisoners, 54 percent are black.

That means that roughly 25,000 black Alabamans are in prison.

Last year, roughly 4,200 black babies were aborted in Alabama, and if you look at the numbers going back to 2006, it seems safe to calculate that over the last ten years, some 50,000 black babies have been aborted in Alabama.

The question, then, is this…

Did the legal murder of 50,000 black unborn children decrease the prison population?

According to the U.S. Census, for every 100,000 black citizens in Alabama, 1,788 end up in prison, which means that of those 50,000 murdered black children, about 2,500 would end up in prison.

What this means is that in order to spare Alabama an additional 2,500 prisoners over ten years (or only 250 a year), Emily Ratajkowski thinks it’s a good idea to literally exterminate the other 47,500 innocent black children.

Emily Ratajkowski believes it is noble and woke to murder 100 percent of unborn black children because five percent might end up in prison.

Emily Ratajkowski is defending the murder of roughly 5,000 black babies per year because 250 might end up in prison.

Emily Ratajkowski Believes Killing Black Babies Is a Public Service

If you read the rest of the article, it gets even worse for poor Emily.

Some Words of Sanity by Rev Jesse Lee Peterson

Rev. Jesse Lee Peterson

The moral state of America has plunged over my lifetime – with the black community leading the way. Men have become increasingly weak, and women angry and out of control. Children grow up without any good examples. I’ve talked to Millennials and younger people who never saw a man of strong character while growing up. Instead, pathetic beta males kiss up to women, thinking they’re showing love and “equality” while bringing out the worst in the women. Today the female-dominated Democrat Party is the party of death.

In New York, the Democrat-majority government passed a new pro-abortion law allowing mothers to kill their unborn children up to the due date. Democrats dubbed it the “Reproductive Health Act,” declaring abortion a “fundamental right.” According to New York Right to Life, the Democrats’ idea of a mother’s “health” involves vague considerations of “age, economic, social and emotional factors.” In reality Democrats put personal convenience above a child’s life, ignoring the rights of the father, spoiling and lying to the mother, who later suffers. Democrats pretend that a human being inside the womb is not a “person” and should die if the mother “chooses.”

Have you ever wondered about the callousness of young black males killing people in America’s inner cities? In a rare honest moment, Hillary Clinton was actually right in the 1990s when she called these killers “super predators” with “no conscience, no empathy.” But consider that these communities are filled with mothers who commit abortions at a higher rate than anywhere in the country – discarding lives like trash. In New York City in recent years, more black babies were aborted than born! In 2009, 57 percent, and in 2012, 56 percent of black pregnancies in the city ended in abortion.

There Is No Such Thing As ‘Reproductive Rights’


Genocide of the black race is not ok. Glenn Kaiser said, “The way you treat the person you love the least is the way you love God the most.

Glenn Kaiser

God gives life and takes it way, when someone put themselves in place of God, their actions repeat the lie from the Garden, “ye shall be as gods…”

“There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death.”

Proverbs 14:12

Folks a day of reckoning is coming, if its not here already, and I don’t want to stand before Almighty God being judged because I said nothing when they came for the unborn, the elderly, the weak, and feeble. Jewish folks keep saying we should never forget the Holocaust, but they ignore the one in their midst. We kill 50 million babies worldwide each year and over 60 million in our country since 1973—38 percent of which are black—but most people don’t care.

The bottom line is we have reaped the whirlwind. The church is supposed to be salt and light to a culture, an ethical firewall, but those before us were ill prepared for the tsunami of challenges to their beliefs. They failed to have an answer to the hope that was in them. The wolves have scattered the flock, but pockets of resistance are fighting back. Sadly, too few voices are crying in the wilderness.

If we are holding out for a political solution, we are putting our faith in the wrong basket. Only the transforming power of God can make any move to uphold life permanent. If Roe is overturned, much more work needs to be done. Our side wants to be left alone while the other guys are all in on serving the State because government power is their god and for many, abortion is their sacrament. Their defeat is certain, but it would be nice to see it in our lifetime.

While you’re downloading Grand Illusions, look for Political Polytheism and read that too, then we’ll talk.

Click below to download free books

Grand Illusions: The Legacy of Planned Parenthood

Political Polytheism