ePub 版

First Plateau 1920-1940

A FEW INDIVIDUALS "crying in the wilderness" - These
were the Sangerites, the Drysdales, the Gambles.

Second Plateau 1940-1960

SMALL GROUPS, working together informally, then as
SMALL ORGANIZATIONS, some help of venture capital
from FOUNDATIONS. These small nucleus groups include
the International Planned Parenthood Federation and
Population Reference Bureau, the population Council,
the Ford Foundation,

Third Plateau 1960-1968

MASS MEDIA coverage, in order to achieve respecta-
bility for subject as a topic for general discussion.
A period of increased foundation interest and the
development of university-based centers during the 1960's

Fourth Plateau 1965-1969

BILLS introduced into Congress - this activity being carried on by leaders within Congress such as the late Senator Gruening or outside Congress by individuals like William Draper, recently appointed U.S. delegate to the World Population Conference in Bucharest.

Fifth Plateau mid-1960's

the Catholic Church remains the singular institution
opposed to population control in all forms including

Sixth Plateau 1970

APPOINTMENT of one or more High Level ADVISORY COMMIS-
SIONS of distinguished citizens to make policy recom-
mendations and WIN PUBLIC SUPPORT for legislation.
The Rockefeller Commission on Population Growth and
the American Future.

Seventh Plateau 1970

Additional Congressional hearings, culminating in
LEGISLATION usually of modest scope and funding. Key
bills include the Tydings Bill and the Environmental
Education Act.


The last plateau had been reached by the Sangerites
during the early 1970's. This included increased
acceptance of population control and birth control
legislation, the increase of the movements structural
and financial stability through increased tax subsi-
dies and its incorporation into the institutions and
mores of society. This action continuing at many
levels including indoctrination of young children
in the elementary and secondary schools, the mass
media, university teaching centers, technological

57-782 0 - 76 - 3

service provided by researchers and the pharmaceutical indus-
try, government agencies at all levels - local/state/federal,
professional groups such as medical societies, foundations, etc.

As I said the Supreme Court abortion decision was an inevitable one. All the cliches of that decision - terms like "unwanted children", "a woman's right to control her own body.", the population explosion stem from the Sangerite ethic. It represented the culmination of more than half a century of dedication and tireless efforts by the Sanger, ites and the Malthusians to convince the American public of the righteousness of the CAUSE and to elevate the SANGERITE-MALTHUSIAN philosophy to that of Public Policy. This final achievement is portrayed quite candidly in this book Breeding Ourselves to Death - the Story of the Hugh Moore Fund by abortion leader Lawrence Lader.

In the section on gaining Congressional Support, former N.Y. Senator Kenneth Keating, then newly appointed National Director of the population Crisis Committee tells about eating in the Senate Dining Room where he could spread the gospel of family planning among old friends, particularly among the Republican leadership. This fight to influence by other population control leaders in Congress goes on today.


But what does all this have to do with this subcommittee hearing on the Human Life Amendment? Simply this

For more than a year the Hogan-Helms Human Life Amendment and similar bills have been buried in the House, where Representative Don Edwards has refused to hold hearings, and in the Senate - hearings are dragged out month after month to get Senators and Representatives through the November watershed without a floor vote on such as the HLA.

Obviously there is no sense of urgency about the matter, with the exception of a handful of dedicated men, the Congress doesn't appear to be the least concerned that its inaction will result in the death of hundreds of thousands of unborn children. The fact that millions of federal tax dollars are used to promote a myriad of anti-life schemesfrom direct abortion payments (Medicaid-ADC) to the research development and promoting of new abortion techniques to the indoctrination of young children of an anti-life ethic - appears to raise no particular concern at family planning authorization or appropriation hearings.

Equally obvious is the fact that under these conditions we will have a difficult time getting a Human Life Amendment passed by both Houses of Congress and on its way to the states for ratification.

My purpose here today is to point out the current committment of the Federal Government including this Congress to the anti-life establishment, and briefly how such a committment was obtained and at what price.

Mr. Chairman, this Congress OWES its vigorous support for a Human Life Amendment which would protect Human life from conception until natural death to the American people. The Coalition would agree that the Hogan-Helms Amendment or the newer Roncallo Amendment would provide such protection.

Apart from the merit of these amendments themselves, we feel that Congress should recognize the fact that through its indifference, ignorance and its inability to withstand the pressures of the anti-life movement, it must bear its share of guilt for the 1972 Abortion decision, and its share of responsibility in seeing a Human Life Amendment is passed to protect the unborn child. Your responsibility, Mr. Chairman, in this matter is very plain.

As for our part, I believe the Coalition and the Pro-Life Movement in the U. S. will continue to fight at all levels - including the Halls of Congress and yes, even in Senate dining rooms - to educate and to promote an ideal that is as revolutionary in our day as the Sangerite ideal was fifty years ago.

That ideal is based on the sanctity and innate goodness of all human life,

Thank you.




Vol. 1 - No. 1
September, 1972
Mrs. Randy Engel, Editor

P. O. Box 315 Export, Pa. 15632

WASHINGTON, DC . . . . . . Latest followup of the antilife Rockefeller Commission involves the U.S. Office of Education, and the non-profit company known as Population Education, Inc. which was created by the commission and produced the propaganda film of commission findings and recommendations.

Population Education, Inc. is directed by Christian N. Ramsey who served as a Vice-Chairman on Presidential Commission on Population Growth and the American Future.

On June 5 and again on July 27, the U.S. Coalition for Life contacted the Office of Education for a list of population oriented environmental education projects the agency sponsored in 1971 and 1972. According to Walter Bogan, Director of the Office of Environmental Education (OE), six projects were selected in 1972. ZERO POPULATION GROWTH REPRESENTATIVES were used as councils.

Among the six projects listed was a $50,000 grant to the Population Education, Inc., Christian Ramsey, Director for the purpose of providing supplemental curriculum material for secondary school in population education. The grant was funded under the Cooperative Research Act P.L. 83-531.

Another smaller grant of $4,000 was awarded to the FargoMoorehead Chapter of ZPG for a rural pilot project on man's activities and life styles on the environment which included the establishment of environmental booths and exhibits at state and county fairs.

A complete list of these grants are available from the USCL.


HIR 837, the Congressional flip-side of S. J. Res. 108 on population stabilization has been circulated to the full House by Congressmen Morris Udall (AzD) and Frank Horton (NYR) who are currently scouting for co-sponsors. The House bill has been referred to the Government Operations Committee. Pro-Life leaders should request that their names be put on the Committee's mailing list to be notified when hearings are to be scheduled and should begin preparing their testimony - both oral and written. Excellent back ground material can be found in Declaration of U.S. Policy of Population Stabilization by Voluntary Means, 1971, a compilation of the Senate hearings on SJR 108. Order from U.S. Printing Office, Washington, Doc. 68-976-0, $2.50.

... Another House bill HR 11226 to establish a Population Growth Institute and sponsored by Esch (MIR) has been referred to the same Government Operations Committee.

McNamara's Bank has recently published its sector working paper on Population Planning, designed to help member, borrowing nations reduce their population growth rates. The filing of a demographic analysis and survey of a country's population policies or programs in their economic reports to the World Bank is now required of all developing nations who wish Bank aid. As of Jan. 1, 1972, the Bank is sending its missionaries abroad in order to set up the necessary institutional structures required to plan and administer family planning-population limitation programs.

Annex 3 of the Bank's report on Contraceptive Method contains serious errors. For example, the IUD is listed as a contraceptive rather than an abortifacient agent. The section on "rhythm” mentions the calendar and temperature methods of regulating births but ommits the newer Billings Ovulation Method which has both universal appeal and applicability. None of the latter methods, however, the report notes have been used

on a mass scale. For population control, the plug-or-drug approach have greater appeal. The Bank report praises the safety and efficiency of suction abortion and highlights the future of new abortifacient agents such as the vaginal prostaglandin suppositories which "requires no regulation of sex activity and greatly reduces the need for education.” This statement suggests that the Bank's oversees population aides will not trouble perspective patients' consciences with the abortifacient nature of their new magical pills guaranteed to "bring on a period". It also suggests that World Bank leaders need to be initiated into the Pro-Life facts of life. Write: Robert S. McNamara, President, World Bank Group, 1818 H St., N.W., Washington, D.C. 20433. Population Planning, Mr. 1972 available from World Bank at no charge.

It is no well kept secret that some Pro-Life groups been waiting as long as 18 months for a ruling from the Internal Revenue Service on their tax-exempt-tax deductible status. In the meantime, the Anti-Life establishment enjoys the exempt-deductible status which enables them to rack in foundation and business monies. Consider the following

Citizen's Committee on Population Growth and the American Future, the newest miscarriage of JDR3rd's Commission which was created on July 1, 1972 has already obtained its tax-exempt and deductible rating from the IRS. Leaders of the Committee include Carol Foreman, former Commission aide, student Stephen Salyer, Hugh Downs, and Eleanor Norton described by ZPG as “a black woman who champions liberalization of abortion and other human rights.” (USCL Reprint #101)

The ZPGrowth Fund established in 1971 has been declared a tax-deductible educational foundation. Fund board members include Paul Ehrlich, Richard Lamm, Don Shaw and Rodney Shaw. ZPG's computerized Abortion Data Bank is a project of the Fund. (USCL Reprint #102)

Even well-known population control lobby groups such as the Population Crisis Committee enjoy a limited favorable tax status with contributions to the Committee deductible up to 50% of the net adjusted income of the donor. The PCC is designated as a “publicly supported charitable" group operating as an educational institution in the population field. (USCL Reprint #103)

Letters of inquiry into suspect IRS practices may be directed to: The Internal Revenue Service, 1111 Constitution Ave., N.W., Washington, D.C.

The specter of US-financed, foreign aboritoriums was raised in the Agency for International Development, Dec. 1971, Population Program Assistance report which states," legal restrictions on post conceptive fertility control are removed, for example, India in 1971, it is foreseeable that family planning program strategy will center upon the early diagnosis and relief of unwanted pregnancy, followed by provision of the contraceptive information and services needed to prevent subsequent unwanted pregnancies."

“Such pregnancy-centered programs can be much more efficient than ordinary family planning programs because women who believe they may have an unwanted pregnancy will actively seek out any facility offering relief, and hence educational and promotional costs of the f.p. program can be greatly reduced, and the time from inception of the program to reduction of fertility can be minimized.”

“Provision of relief of unwanted pregnancy plus effective contraception, for example, sterilization, can achieve fertility reduction of more than one birth per clinic acceptor and have a powerful and rapid effect upon fertility patterns.” (pgs. 34-35). PPA Report (Dec. 1971) of A.I.D. available from U.S. Govern

as 66

SUSSEX, N.J. . ... The NATIONAL SOCIAL CONDITIONING CAMPS bill, H.R. 6781, introduced by Rep. Murphy of N.Y. has been referred to the Committee of the Judiciary.

The first of the NSCC, "a prototype of similar camps to be established in every state of the Union” will be Camp ShangriLi, Sussex, N.J., open year-round for all dependent children between the ages of 7 - 12.

The multi-purpose camps are designed to prevent pre-teen delinquency in “disaffluent” youth who are too poor to attend camp or "who might require attendance at camp for the prevention of delinquency.” Referrals are made by both private and state-federal agencies. For details write - National Social Conditioning Camps, Joseph Gainer, Treasurer, 2 Pennsylvania Plaza, N.Y., N.Y. 10001.

ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 $2.00. Inquiries into A.I.D.'s abortifacient financing and policies may be directed to: R. T. Ravenholt, Director, Office of Population, A.I.D., Washington, D.C. 20523, and to your own Congressional representatives.

A USCL inquiry to the Food and Drug Administration of HEW into the "status" of abortifacient drugs brought the following reply from Information Specialist Edward Nida:

several investigational New Drug exemptions (IND) to the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act are in effect for clinical tests of such drugs (“morning after” pills). This is in effect a test license. We are prohibited from commenting on who has such licenses and for which drugs.” Mr. Nida states the "informed consent" obligation of IND holders then, “FDA's stand on abortifacient drugs is that they are new drugs limited to investigational (test use) only. Federal law prohibits promotion or other commercialization of these drugs UNTIL THEY ARE PROVEN SAFE AND EFFECTIVE.” He concludes, “I hope this information will be useful; unfortunately it is all I am free to tell you until these drugs are licensed.” (Oct. 19, 1971).

PALO ALTO, CALIF. Zero Population Growth, Inc. has been recognized by the Selective Service System as alternate service for conscientious objectors. The ZPG national office and a number of chapters is employing C.O.'s, according to the ZPG National Reporter, Feb. 1972.

Apparently, the reluctance to spill blood does not extend to the mass computerized killing of unborn children via ZPG's Abortion Data Bank which as of June 1971 has handled 1000 abortion "hits". Information from Bank on the pregnant woman - her address, stage of pregnancy, etc., is fed into a shared-time computer which in turn spews out the names of 10 doctors, hospitals or clinics willing to do the abortion. No fee is charged and only 25% of the women using the bank make a contribution of $5.00 or more. ZPG's income loss is supplemented by TAXDEDUCTIBLE PRIVATE DONATIONS.

In Michigan this Fall, ZPG will be pushing an abortion referendum which permits abortion up to 20 weeks, on request, when performed by a licensed medical or osteopathic physician in a licensed hospital or other facility approved by the Dept. of Public Health. The Michigan campaign is headed by Dr. Jack M. Stack, Lansing, Michigan. (USCL Reprint 104-10¢).


“PLANNING TO PREVENT OVERPOPULATION OF THE EARTH MUST INCLUDE EUTHANASIA, either negative or positive”.... laws regarding euthanasia should "be changed to conform to what seems right and what the public desires.” we should increase our activities immediately and to a major degree, in dealing with population control, selective abortion, problems of mentation, aging, suicide, and negative euthanasia. It seems unwise to attempt to bring about major changes permitting positive euthanasia until we have made major progress in changing laws and policies pertaining to negative euthanasis ...." These comments were taken from “Number; Types and Duration of Human Lives”, by Robert H. Williams, M.D., Northwest Medicine, July, 1970, Vol. 69 #7, pgs. 493-496. Dr. Williams of the University of Washington illustrates the anti-life domino theory to a superb degree. For a study copy of the full text write, USCL Reprint #105-0.


Lesson – Pro-Life forces must begin work now on halting taxfinanced clinical testing of abortafacient drugs which contrary to FDA judgement are notoriously deadly for unborn babies. For a detailed analysis of Federal abortifacient funding and programs see Pro-Life Report on Population Growth and the American Future, available from WCUC, Box 8071, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15216 or PHL Greensburg, Box 416, Greensburg, Pa. 15601. $.75 each.

The new Child Development Act, S.3617 which passed the Senate June 20th is presently awaiting House action. There are a number of disturbing sections of the bill which may pose a potential threat to both parent(s) and child including referral services for “family planning” and purchase of such services when not otherwise available to families enrolled in the program; the inclusion of f.p. in health and mental services; the entire hierarchy of bureaucratic agencies, prime sponsor, Child and Family Services Council, local councils and delegate agencies; the training and certification of Child Development Associates; the authorization of the Secretary of HEW to carry out research and demonstration projects and a multitude

of other potentially harmful activities; the Child Development Research Council; the fact that very young children UNDER the age of two could be registered under certain circumstances; and the incredible segment of the Act having to do with the use of children as subjects of research and experimentation. A thorough public debate on this Bill is needed.

BOSTON, MASS. Formal charges of violation of the Fairness Doctrine have been filed with the FCC by the U.S. Coalition'for Life against WBZ-TV4, Boston, producers of the Saturday morning children's program EARTH LAB.

On Feb. 19, 1972, Earth Lab featured a representative from ZPG's New England Speakers Bureau, Dr. Ronald Arenson. Shortly thereafter, the USCL contacted Shep Morgan, the producer of Earth Lab requesting that a pro-life representative be given an opportunity to present the other side of the population question. No reply was received.

On June 2, 1972, a second request was filed with WBZ-TV4 with carbons to the FCC. Within five days, Mr. Morgan notified the USCL that the entire matter had been turned over to their Westinghouse legal staff. On June 18 Randy Engel, Executive Director of the USCL, in N.Y., wrote Mr. Johnson at the Westinghouse legal department requesting an interview. No reply was received.

Earth Lab is currently filming its 1972-73 programs which may explain the desire of WBZ-TV4 to try to procrastinate the showdown with the USCL.

A formal brief containing ZPG's Malthusian concepts as presented by Dr. Arenson along with details on the organization's multi-anti-life activities was sent to the FCC on July 27. Pro-life support for the USCL action can be directed to both, WBZ-TV4 in Boston and William B. Ray, Chief, Complaints and Compliance Division, Broadcast Bureau, FCC, Washington, D.C. For details explaining the applicability of the Fairness Doctrine write for FCC's Public Notice, July 1, 1964; Vol. 29 No. 145 of the Federal Register, Pgs. 10415-10427.

HARVARD U., CAMBRIDGE, MASS. .... Should the Roman Catholic Church be tried before a World Court for crimes against humanity for its opposition to Birth Control which (1) in effect requires millions of people to have unwanted children (2) forces unwanted children to live a life of poverty and misery (3) permits these unwanted children to drain world resources which are needed by wanted children born of responsible parents practicing birth control and (4) in general, by its obstinancy fails to reduce resultant suffering and death? .... "What additional facts and statistics would you want in order to determine (1) whether the Church should be brought before a world court, and (2) whether it should be found guilty of any crime?"

This "when did you stop beating your wife" orientated discussion question is taken almost verbatim from POPULATION CONTROL - Whose Right to Live, an American Education Publications Unit Book adapted from the Harvard Social Studies Project and edited by Charles Cutler.

The book is part of a series of 28 paper-backs covering a wide range of topics on foreign and domestic social study issues, begun at Harvard U., which eventually became one of a dozen college and university centers designated by the U.S. Office of Education as part of Project Social Studies.

« 上一頁繼續 »