In this conclusion to my series of articles on Margaret Sanger, I am going to be sharing the history of her eugenic views. As the last two installments have shown, Sanger was not racist and was against abortion and contraceptives that take place after fertilization. When people rightfully criticize her views on eugenics, the misconceptions about her other views often take the spotlight. For example, the mostly untrue statement, “Sanger supported eugenics, killing black babies through abortion.” Let’s take a look at what eugenics actually meant to her and a little about the movement her time.

A surprising friend of Sanger and fellow advocate of eugenics was Helen Keller. Although she is regarded positively and used in pro-life arguments, Keller supported child euthanasia. She used language such as “weeding of the human garden”. “It is the possibilities of happiness, intelligence and power that give life its sanctity, and they are absent in the case of a poor, misshapen, paralyzed, unthinking creature.”1 She wasn’t alone in her views, In 1937 a US poll found that 45% of Americans supported euthanasia for “defective infants”. 2

One of her mentors, Alexander Graham Bell, who was also an advocate for the deaf was heavily involved in American eugenics. He helped organize the First International Conference on Eugenics in 1912 and was an honorary president of the next in 1921. Although he was against forced sterilization and believed that legislation wasn’t the proper way to enforce his views, he did not approve of deaf people marrying or socializing with each other. It is hard to imagine now, but he thought that his views would help deaf-mute people. 3

Theodore Roosevelt was also a eugenist, who fought against birth control. He believed that women who did not have children were traitors and failures. However, towards other classes of civilization, he had different views. “I wish very much that the wrong people could be prevented entirely from breeding; and when the evil nature of these people is sufficiently flagrant, this should be done. Criminals should be sterilized and feeble-minded persons forbidden to leave offspring behind them.”4

George Bernard Shaw, Nellie McClung and other members of the Famous Five, Winston Churchill and many other historical figures were eugenicists. Yet each of them is praised and regarded as good people. The history of eugenics is deep and very interesting (and disappointing) to study.

Sanger believed in eugenics, but there was a difference between her and other members of the group. While most thought that the “fit” population should have lots of children, Sanger thought that everyone should have fewer children, partly because of her of her concern for women’s health and also because of her views on over-population. This lead to some controversy against her within the movement.

She called the arguments of these “race suicide” alarmists, “sheer foolishness”. 5 She said that it was just as wrong for a rich, well-educated woman to have many children, one after the other, as it is for a poor person. Her concern was again with the health of the mother and child, as well as believing that unwilling mothers who had big families were “slaves” and their lives no longer independent.

However, Sanger did go further when talking about the “unfit”. “By all means there should be no children when either mother or father suffers from such diseases as tuberculosis, gonorrhea, syphilis, cancer, epilepsy, insanity, drunkenness and mental disorders. In the case of the mother, heart disease, kidney trouble and pelvic deformities are also a serious bar to childbearing.”6 She continued by explaining why she believed this. She spoke about miscarriages, dangerous pregnancies to both the unborn and mother. She discussed the passing down of diseases and fetal alcohol spectrum disorder. She also wrote about crime, “insanity”, prostitution and child labour being caused by families that are larger than they can afford or genetically unhealthy.

She used the term 'human weeds', not only to describe those she considered unfit, but any baby that was not intentionally conceived. This term was very common among the eugenics movement in her day, as mentioned before it was used by Helen Keller. It seems to have been coined by botanists involved, such as Luther Burbank. Sanger also used the metaphor of breeding racehorses to talk about human populations, another very common comparison of the day, also used by Theodore Roosevelt who bred horses.

There is no doubt prejudice against those with diseases and disabilities woven throughout her writings and outlook. The idea of Fit vs. Unfit, a eugenic idea. She views them as deserving of fewer rights and a drag upon society and government. She never condones killing them or ending their lives after conception. Her outlook was certainly ableist. The way of thinking was a very slippery slope that led to the atrocities committed against groups of people in the United States and Nazi Germany, and can also be linked with euthanasia and abortion today.



STERILIZATION



In the United States, sterilization laws were put in place between 1907-1963 in over 30 states, and over 64,000 people were forcibly sterilized. Later on, Nazis would cite these programs during the Nuremberg trials as a defence of their behaviour.

A particular case involved Mrs. Cassidente of Denver, whose five children were “neglected and malnourished” and whose home was “filthy.” 7 In court, social workers tried to have her children removed from her custody. The judge gave her the option of removal or sterilization. Her husband agreed with sterilization but she did not. She was forcibly sterilized. Sanger commented on this, “In the case of Mrs. Cassidente, of Denver, one must remember that such cases are to be looked upon as one views a war measure in a great and trying emergency.” 8

Sanger seems to go back and forth on whether or not sterilization should be enforced. Sometimes she writes that no one should be forced, other times she changes her mind. In ‘The Pivot of Civilization’ she says, “Every feeble-minded girl or woman of the hereditary type, especially of the moron class, should be segregated during the reproductive period. Otherwise, she is almost certain to bear imbecile children, who in turn are just as certain to breed other defectives. The male defectives are no less dangerous... when we realize that each feeble-minded person is a potential source of an endless progeny of defect, we prefer the policy of immediate sterilization, of making sure that parenthood is absolutely prohibited to the feeble-minded.” 9

This is reflective of the laws of her time when people in mental institutions were forcibly sterilized. However, in an article she wrote on sterilization in 1951, she says “The program in this country at least, does not involve compulsory features. No one here proposes that some official be endowed with the authority to order anyone to be sterilized.” 10 Rather, she wanted education and voluntary procedures.

Honestly, it is very confusing reading her views on sterilization. She admits that there are many concerns about how to implement a program. “In passing, we should here recognize the difficulties presented by the idea of "fit" and "unfit." Who is to decide this question? The grosser, the more obvious, the undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind. But among the writings of the representative Eugenists one cannot ignore the distinct middle-class bias that prevails.” 11

“As for the sterilization of habitual criminals, not merely must we know more of heredity and genetics in general, but also acquire more certainty of the justice of our laws and the honesty of their administration before we can make rulings of fitness or unfitness merely upon the basis of a respect for law.” 12

My conclusion from reading Sanger’s writings is that she supported voluntary sterilization, except in cases which she concluded were “grosser, more obvious, undeniably feeble-minded...” and must be forced. She recognized the prejudices and dangers in implementing programs of sterilization and urged caution, but also saw population control as an essential issue. While she believed it was ideal that people would voluntarily use birth control & sterilization, she thought in some cases it must be forced as if they were in ‘war’.

I found Sanger’s speech ‘The Children’s Article’ to be eye-opening into her outlook. It includes the weed analogy, touches on overpopulation, sterilization, eugenics and her ideas for who should and shouldn’t have children. It includes the following popular quote by her, “I would like to suggest Civil Service examinations for parenthood! Prospective parents after such an examination would be given a parenthood license, proving that they are physically and mentally fit to be the fathers and mothers of the next generation.” Sanger goes on to say that the examinations should be done by ‘unborn’ children, and an organization for the prevention of cruelty to unborn children should be formed. I am including a link to this in the bibliography! 13

As I’ve studied Margaret Sanger’s writings over the past year, I’ve learned a lot about her. There is a lot of misinformation on the internet, spread many times unintentionally. If I wrote an article about how Sanger was racist, making up quotes and taking them out of context, very few would take the time to fact-check it. It would probably be accepted as truth, as I would have accepted it a year ago because of my preconceived ideas.

History is incredibly complicated. Many of those who we hail as heroes had racist and bigoted views. Many of those we curse as villains shared their wrong views with those we admire. Sanger does not seem like a hero or a villain to me. Her views were shaped by her childhood and experiences as a nurse, and she seemed like a very skeptical and pessimistic woman.

Sanger held views I disagree with, and it is valid to criticize her for what she said. She held outdated and wrong ideas. We can talk about her legacy – Planned Parenthood, how the organization has changed since her death, and which of her ideas it held on to. Sanger wrote enough to disprove or disagree with, there’s is no need or justification for untrue claims about her being racist, a Nazi, or an abortionist. It is never right to put words in someone’s mouth that they never said, in order to paint them in a bad light. We must be honest about history, both the good and bad aspects.

1. Helen Keller:  ‘Physicians Juries for Defective Babies’

http://eugenics.us/helen-keller-physicians-juries-for-defective-babies-article-in-the-new-republic-1915/217.htm

2. The Fortune Quarterly Survey: IX. Fortune, July 1937, pp. 96, 106.

3. ‘Why Helen Keller Believed In Eradicating People With Disabilities', by Katie Schuermann

Bell, Alexander Graham – Eugenics Archive

http://eugenicsarchive.ca/discover/connections/512eed4734c5399e2c000001

4. ‘When America Believed in Eugenics’, by Victoria Brignell

https://www.newstatesman.com/society/2010/12/disabled-america-immigration

5. ‘Woman and the New Race’, Chapter V

6. ‘Woman and the New Race’, Chapter VII

7. San Fransisco Call, Volume 110, Number 123, 28^th November 1921

https://cdnc.ucr.edu/?a=d&d=SFC19211128.2.248&e=-------en--20--1--txt-txIN--------1

8. Stop Perpetuating The Unfit By A National Policy on Limitation of Families, Margaret Sanger

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=306688.xml

9. ‘The Pivot of Civilization’, Chapter IV

10. ‘Sterilization: A modern Medical Program for Health & Human Welfare’, Margaret Sanger

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=239501.xml

11. ‘The Pivot of Civilization’, Chapter IV

12. ‘The Pivot of Civilization’, Chapter IX

13. ‘The Children’s Era’, Margaret Sanger

https://www.nyu.edu/projects/sanger/webedition/app/documents/show.php?sangerDoc=303355.xml

 

On a sunny day in Brooklyn, October 16th, 1916, the doors to the first birth control clinic in America were opened. In the pamphlet inviting them, women had been told, “DO NOT KILL, DO NOT TAKE LIFE, BUT PREVENT.” Now they lined the halls, waiting their turn to hear the information. As groups of women were ushered in, they were told that no matter how early it was performed, abortion was taking life and was wrong. Contraception was encouraged, which although being "a little trouble" was worth it because life had not yet begun. 1

Who was running this clinic? None other than the “notorious” Margaret Sanger, who would end up in jail for her activities. After the opening, rumours were spread that they were committing abortions, which scared many women away, but drew a new crowd in. When a Jewish wife and mother threatened to kill herself if she could not have an abortion, Sanger convinced her not to kill herself or her baby. 1

One of the most famous quotes by Margaret Sanger goes like this, “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.” 2 

It’s the first quote that comes up when you google her name. It’s used by many pro-lifers when talking about the history of planned parenthood, I have used it myself. 

About a year ago, a pro-choicer told me that I was taking the quote out of context. It was a ridiculous claim. Of course Sanger was talking about abortion! Everyone knows that she promoted abortion, especially for those with disabilities, for races she looked down on and for poor populations. I decided to start digging into her writings, as it would be the easiest way to expose her. 

It’s almost been a year since I first began my research. I’ve read many of Sanger’s books, including her autobiography, ‘Woman and the New Race’, and ‘The Pivot of Civilization’. I’ve also done searches through her entire collection of writings, and have found that my perception of her was not entirely accurate. 

Sanger is often depicted as an abortion fanatic, sometimes painted with blood running down her face and hands as she holds an aborted baby. However, over and over again in her writings, she classed abortion with infanticide and child abandonment. 3 She called it a horror 4, abhorrent practice 5, barbaric & crude 6, and a disgrace to civilization. 7 She said that permitting thousands of women each year to go through abortions is absurd cruelty 8 and that abortion is inhuman. 9 In the strongest language possible she condemned abortion. One of her chapters even begins with a poem by Amelia Josephine Burr entitled, “The Song of the Unborn’. 10 She also referred to abortion as "killing of babies in the womb" 11, and said that prenatal care was essential, as the unborn baby has "rights no less imperative". 12

In 1918, she defined abortion as anything which attempts to remove or stop further growth after the sperm meets the ovum. 13 In other words, she also would not have approved of birth control that works after fertilization. When a Russian doctor told her that they had birth control, but then explained that it was abortion, she said, “We don’t want that. Birth control is different.” 14

Sanger’s first introduction to abortion was during her training as a nurse. She worked in hospitals with poor women, who came in mangled and dying from abortions. Aside from calling out abortion for ending a life, she wrote chapters on abortion’s effects on women, the dangers to their bodies and health. This seemed to be her main focus when she wrote about abortion.

Sanger peddled birth control as a way to prevent and end abortion. She believed that laws were not enough to stop it. As long as women didn't have an education, continued having large families they couldn't afford, she believed that they would go to desperate means. She pointed to history as a witness to the fact. "Family limitation will always be practised as it is now being practised–-either by Birth Control or by abortion. We know that. The one means health and happiness–-a stronger, better race. The other means disease, suffering, death.” 15

Let’s circle back to her quote about killing an infant being the most merciful thing you can do. To be completely honest, I still don’t understand what she was saying. She wasn’t talking about abortion, that’s for sure. The chapter in which the quote is included talks about the death rate of children during their first year of life. She says that 12th born children have a 60% mortality rate, then goes on to say that those who live for more than a year very often die before they reach the age of five. Here is the full paragraph surrounding the quote.

“Many, perhaps, will think it idle to go farther in demonstrating the immorality of large families, but since there is still an abundance of proof at hand, it may be offered for the sake of those who find difficulty in adjusting old-fashioned ideas to the facts. The most merciful thing that the large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it. The same factors which create the terrible infant mortality rate, and which swell the death rate of children between the ages of one and five, operate even more extensively to lower the health rate of the surviving members. Moreover, the overcrowded homes of large families reared in poverty further contribute to this condition. Lack of medical attention is still another factor, so that the child who must struggle for health in competition with other members of a closely packed family has still great difficulties to meet after its poor constitution and malnutrition have been accounted for.” 2

I’m not sure what Sanger is getting at here. It doesn’t seem probable to me that she’s telling parents to kill their children. Was she saying that was the common belief at the time, and why infanticides and abortion were committed? Or maybe she was trying to get her point across that life for the youngest of large families was very difficult in her time, and that dying young was a more merciful end than fighting to survive for the rest of their life? I obviously disagree with that. Life was very hard for poor families during the time in which she lived, but life is worth living despite the struggles that come in it. 

The conclusion to this first installment of my Margaret Sanger series is that she did not support abortion. She was actually anti-abortion and touted birth control as the only way to end the practice. 

Of course, as history shows, birth control did not end abortions. In fact, the organization that she founded with the claim that it would end abortion, is now the primary provider of abortions in the US. Many of the arguments she used to promote birth control are now being used to promote abortion. What would she think of that? 

NOTE: I will be following up with two articles about Sanger on racism & Nazism - which has been published here, eugenics and sterilization which is published here. This is not meant to be a defense of Sanger, I do not consider her a hero or role model. I simply believe that it is important to be accurate, and want to correct myths that have been circulating about her and establish the facts about her. Like most historical figures, she is more complex than we might think.

1 – Margaret Sanger: an autobiography, Chapter 17

2 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter IX

3 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter IV

4 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter IV

5 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter IV

6 – Margaret Sanger: an autobiography, Chapter 15

7 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter XIV

8 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter XVIII

9 – Asia Discovers Birth Control,” Reader’s Digest, July 1956.

10 – The Pivot of Civilization, CHAPTER IV

11 – Woman & The New Race, Chapter XVIII

12 – The Children's Era

https://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/margaretsangerchildrensera.html

13 – Birth Control or Abortion?

https://www.bartleby.com/1013/10.html

14 – Margaret Sanger: an autobiography, Chapter 36

15 – Birth Control or Abortion?

https://www.bartleby.com/1013/10.html

   
 Feminist will rant about how abortions are a woman's right, and how they empower women.

 Pro-choicer's will argue that abortions are choice - 'my body, my choice'.

 They're wrong. Abortions are neither pro-choice, pro-woman, or pro-human.

   Why are abortions anti-woman?

   In the year 2013 alone there were one million, three hundred and thirty thousand sex-selective abortions. That's 1,330,000 girls being aborted, just because they're girls. (Let's not forget in light of this, they're apparently still not considered babies when this is happening.) From 2000-2013, 24,000,000 girls were sex-selectively aborted. That is one sex-selective abortion happening every 18 seconds.
   This isn't just in second world countries, countries in Asia and India where there is a general stigma against girls. Studies have shown that the practice of sex-selective abortions has spread to the UK, Canada, and the USA.
 
   Besides the babies who are being killed during the abortions - many times because of their gender,  woman who have an abortion are also at risk. There are emotional side effects to abortion - according to americanpregnancy.org.

•     Depression
•     Suicidal Thoughts
•     Insomnia & Nightmares
•     Anxiety
•     Eating Disorders
•     Loss of Self-confidence
•     Anger
•     Guilt
•     Regret    

     "....flashbacks and feeling a need to replace the lost child as possible psychological consequences of having an abortion."

     Besides emotional and physiological side effects of abortions on women, there are physical effect.

  "Cervical damage from previously induced abortions increases the risk of miscarriage, premature birth, and complications of labor during later pregnancies by 300 - 500 percent... When the risks of increased pregnancy loss are projected on the population as a whole, it is estimated that aborted women lose 100,000 "wanted" pregnancies each year because of latent abortion morbidity.The researchers found that, compared to women who carried to term, women who had aborted in the year prior to their deaths were 60 percent more likely to die from natural causes, seven times more likely to die from suicide, four times more likely to die of injuries related to accidents and fourteen times more likely to die from homicide." abortionfacts.com

       
   Despite what pro-choice advocates, and pro-choice feminists might say, abortions are not safe and easy for women. Teen Vogue describes the usual symptoms of abortion.

    "You can expect almost 3 solid days of pain. Likely worse than any period symptoms you’ve ever experienced. You’ll love it! It’s like 2 throbbing hot balls of lead are trying to escape your body, all while your stomach contracts over and over again. Huzzahhhhh!"

 
  Besides all the cases against women, stated above - there is yet another large crime against women that is committed by abortions.
   
   Planned Parenthood has been reported many times covering up sex trafficking, and under-age sex trafficking. The women who are having abortions have absolutely no choice in the whole matter. They must have an abortion - it's required. Perhaps they think they may find help from this horrible trap they are in, at the clinic. It doesn't happen that way. Instead the crimes are hidden up, and the women go back to enduring the horrible abuse they are faced with every day.

    Why are abortions not pro-choice? Even though they are anti-women, isn't that still their choice?
 
   Babies, or 'fetuses'/'tissue' as they are called by pro-choice advocates have no choice. You might think it doesn't matter, they aren't really people yet. This is not true. Here's the development of a baby from five - nineteen weeks into pregnancy.
 
  Five Weeks - into pregnancy, and your baby's heart has already started beating.  
  Six Weeks -  your baby's mouth, nose, brain, and intestines are beginning to take shape.
  Eight Weeks - your baby has begun to move around. It as developed feet and hands. Nerve cells are branching out. Its lungs have already begun to develop, and breathing tubes have extended from the throat to lungs.
   Ten Weeks - Your baby's nails have begun to form. Its limbs can bend. The most critical portion of development is completed.
    Eleven & Twelve Weeks - Your baby is pretty much fully formed. It can hiccup, kick, and stretch. Fingers have begun to open and close, toes can curl. Reflexes have already started kicking in - your baby can feel movement on your tummy. Its mouth has also begun to make sucking movements.
   Thirteen Weeks - Your baby has tiny fingerprints now. Veins and organs are visible through its skin.

Second Trimester

  Fourteen Weeks - Your baby is using its facial muscles! Its brain impulses have begun to fire up. Oh, and the kidneys are fully functioning.
  Fifteen Weeks - Your baby can sense light, and will move away from it. *Gender can now be told from ultrasounds. This is when many people have sex-selective abortions.*
  Seventeen Weeks - Your baby's skeleton is hardening to bone. Your baby can also move its joints.
  Nineteen Weeks - You baby can probably hear your voice now. Its smell, vision, and taste are also developing.

   Now, I just want to remind you. Don't be confused. This is still not considered a baby by pro-choice advocates. It's just a "fetus/tissue".

   Abortions are legal in Canada, up to birth. In the USA, most states consider abortion legal until the 24th week of pregnancy.
   As you can see, the baby are ready has developed feet, hands, legs, arms, nails, kidneys, intestines, fingerprints, and its heart is beating. The baby is developing its senses, and it can kick, hiccup, and stretch. It's nerve cells have branched out. This is a person. Even if it's currently living in its mother's body, it is its own person, and is not part of its mother's body. Yet it has no choice in the matter.
 
   Fathers very often do not have a choice in abortion. Although many, pressure their wives/girlfriends to have an abortion, others don't want it. But it doesn't matter. In most cases, they have no say.
 
   There is another crime against humanity that is brought about through abortion. Many babies who potentially could have a handicap are aborted. An example of this are down-syndrome children.

    In Iceland, 100% of babies diagnosed with down syndrome are aborted. In Great Britain 90% of babies with Down Syndrome are aborted. It is predicted that pretty soon down syndrome children will be extinct. This isn't because people won't be having babies with down syndrome, it's because they will be aborting them.

    "We have begun to see more and more young people with Down syndrome graduating from high schools, some going on to higher education and learning employable skills. There are accomplished musicians, artists, golfers, models, actors and public speakers, as well as good employees making significant contributions to their companies and communities. These are all role models for what can be done in spite of one extra chromosome." Karen Gaffney - A down-syndrome athlete.

     Just because these people will have some struggles in their lives, they are encouraged to be aborted. They can feel joy, love, sadness, and do so many things, yet they are deemed not precious enough to live. They have no choice.

  So no. Abortions are not pro-woman. They are not pro-choice. They are not creating better lives for anyone.
   
   I would like to note - if you've had an abortion, this does not mean you are a bad person. There is always hope. You can get support, help, and redemption.

   Sincerely,
     Rachel
 

  
Christmas time is here, and everyone is busy bustling around finding gifts for their loved ones and relatives. I mean what better time to show how much you love them, than the birthday of Christ. (except He was actually born in the spring). I certainly think that it's a wonderful time to show the love of Christ to others, and give. But before you go off and start buying gifts please take a moment to consider if Christ would approve of your gifts. I decided to make a list of things you should NOT buy as gifts. 
    1. Electronics
 I know they are something teens love, and frankly everyone seems to love them. The problem with them is that they are produced by slaves, in both African mines, and Chinese factories! The second reason is that they're very addictive. I know, I waste so much time on my phone and the computer. We most certainly don't need any more distractions to keep us from spending quality time with God, and our family and friends. 
     2. Chocolate
   The moment I tell someone I don't like chocolate I get a round of horrified gasps, and immediately the questions pop up. Truth is this is many people's favourite food. It certainly seems like a good gift, but I beg you don't buy it. All the big chocolate companies use child labour and slave labour to produce the chocolate. Think about it, if the person you're buying the gift for were working there with no pay, using dangerous chemicals would you still buy it? If you really really want to buy chocolate please make sure it's fair trade, so at least there some chance that it hasn't been produce through forced labour. Nestle, Hershey, and Mars are just a few of the really bad companies.
     3. Clothes
 Some clothes are fine to buy but there are many companies who I strongly urge you not to buy from. H&M, Nike, Victoria's Secret, Walmart, Gap, La Senza, Disney (I know I'm really disappointed that they use sweat shops.), Sears, Joe Fresh, Forever 21, Urban Outfitters, Aeropostale, & Mark and Spenser. There are many more but these are some of the worst for using sweat shops, and slavery. 
       4. Cheap Toys and Toys R' Us
    It might seem a good idea to find a last minute gift for a nephew or grandchild, or cousin, but please do not buy china made toys. Dollar store toys are most probably made in a factory by children, and Toys R' Us has been found to use forced and child labour. Think about it the toys you're buying for a child, were made by a child, and not in good terms either. If the child you are buying the gift for was in that situation would you still buy it? 
   7. Bath & Body Works
This is a very popular place to buy christmas presents. Every time I walk into that store I literally feel sick. It smells horrific to me, but that's not why I included it on this list. Did you know that it funds planned parenthood? So does Ben & Jerry, and Avon, so please don't buy from them. 
    8. Starbucks
  It might be tempting to simply get a starbucks gift certificate but please don't. On top of them using slavery for their coffee, they also fund planned parenthood.
    Here's an official list of the companies that fund planned parenthood. Adobe, American Cancer Society, American Express, AT&T, Avon, Bank of America, Bath & Body Works, Ben & Jerry’s, Clorox, Converse, Deutsche Bank, Dockers, Energizer, Expedia, ExxonMobil, Fannie Mae, Groupon, Intuit, Johnson & Johnson, La  Senza, Levi Strauss, Liberty Mutual, Macy’s, March of Dimes, Microsoft, Morgan Stanley, Nike, Oracle, PepsiCo, Pfizer, Progressive, Starbucks, Susan G. Komen, Tostitos, Unilever, United Way, Verizon, Wells Fargo.
    Please don't think that it's impossible to find a gift. It's not, I'm just asking you to consider whether you will still buy the item if your friend was the one making it, if your nephew or niece was the one being aborted. Also ask yourself if Christ would approve of this gift. 
    I know that I appreciate gifts that are homemade, or something that will help me spend time with the giver. A good book can always do the trick also! Also don't forget that we should be giving our money to those who need it most, and not only this time of year.
    Sincerely, Rachel

  I've been hearing a bit about the 'red cup controversy', especially among Christians. From what I've picked up, many people are upset that Starbucks' Christmas cup is red. Yeah, it used to have fancier designs, snowflakes and stuff I guess, and this year it's just an ombre red or something. So of course there's an uproar that they're raging the war against Christmas, and thus Christ.
     Well, I've got a lot to say about this. It makes me quite angry, so naturally I had to write about it.
 
     First off, why does this bother you so much? Starbucks has never been a Christian company, and why should we expect more? If you're worried about your cup not looking 'Christian' why don't you worry about the goddess logo on the front? She's topless in, case you haven't noticed, and she's what's called a siren. Don't know what that is? It's a mythological creature, who is kind of like a mermaid, except she's a temptress who lures men to their death. Sorry to have to break the news to you, but I don't think Christ would want His name on a cup that has that on it's as the logo.

      Did you know that Starbucks supports planned parenthood? They also match their employee's donations to planned parenthood. Just in case you're wondering if there's anything they do bad beside killing babies and selling their body parts, they're also pretty racist.

As LifeNews previously reported, 79% of all Planned Parenthood’s abortion facilities are located near minority neighborhood. In fact, since 1973, approximately 13 million black babies have been lost because of abortion, and out of the approximately 4000 abortions that are performed daily in the United States, 1452 of them are performed on African American women and their unborn children.

 It's not hard to know God's stance on the subject.

"Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart..."                                                                                                    - Jeremiah 1:5

Whoever shed the blood of man (unjustly), by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God has God made man.      -Genesis 9:6

      Thirdly, what's inside the cup? Coffee, I guess it's obvious. Maybe you have tea in it, but I'm going to focus the majority have coffee in their cups.
        Where does the coffee come from? Starbucks has been continually ignored the demand for fair trade coffee. As we've seen before, products with a high demand have been made with slave trade, because there's just so much needed. This goes for coffee as 99% of it is not fair trade, and has been harvested and grown by slaves. For example Guatemala is one of the leading country to produce coffee, and it has been known to use children as workers, mostly underpaid workers, called 'family helpers'. There are over 1/2 million children workers involved in the process of growing coffee, in Guatemala alone! Adult workers have to pick 100 pounds of coffee beans, just to reach the local minimum wage. That's $3 is you wondered. Over half  the workers assessed didn't reach that amount, so who knows what they were paid. Below is a chart of their policies.
     What does God think about slavery? Here's one of the many verses on the subject. It's pretty strong I'd say.

     "He shall judge the poor of the people, he shall save the children of the needy, and shall break in pieces the oppressor." Psalms 72:4

     So do are you still worried about the red cup? Do you think Jesus wants His birth to be glorified on a cup that has a logo of a temptress on it, supports a company that kills babies, and is filled with a drink made of coffee beans harvested by slaves. I sure don't.
    In fact I never want to drink or eat anything from Starbucks. I don't care if people think I'm being radical, because I'd rather be called radical and be on the side of Jesus, than be on the side of the world.
   Please think about this next time you're considering buying a starbucks, or complaining about it's lack of Christmas decor.
     Sincerely, Rachel