Why We Oppose Planned Parent Hood

Planned Parenthood is not a benevolent organization trying to strengthen women's rights. It is a cold, calculating group intent on spreading the Humanist religion, luring our children into their web of premarital sex and unlimited abortions, reducing the population of minorities in particula and filling its coffers with the profits from sales of birth control devices.

PP COMES BETWEEN PARENTS & CHILDREN

Planned Parenthood pushes what it calls “confidential services” for minors, meaning that PP will provide all types of “reproductive services” to young girls, including potentially dangerous prescription medication and invasive surgery, without their parents’ knowledge. In its 1993-1994 Annual Report, PP bragged of its “unswerving commitment to confidentiality.”

In most states, PP assigns teens a “code name” so that PP can call the girls at home and pretend to be a girlfriend. (Recently, the code names in Springfield, IL; Chicago, IL; and Kingston, NY; were Heather, Nancy and Lucy, respectively.)

As long ago as 1979, the Sunday Independent newspaper in Wilkes-Barre, PA, reported that Planned Parenthood was transporting high school girls out of town, during school hours, to get abortions without the parents being notified.

Planned Parenthood will give minor girls Norplant, Depo-Provera shots, and even abortions without their parents’ knowledge.

PP DOES NOT OPPOSE TEENAGE SEX

Planned Parenthood does not view teenage sex as wrong. PP is upset only if sex results in “unwanted” births. Planned Parenthood’s sex education programs are not about telling children how to avoid sex. They are, rather, designed to indoctrinate our children into what PP calls “responsible sexuality.” By this PP means it is okay for kids to have sex as long as they avoid pregnancy; or if they do get pregnant, have an abortion.

Former PP president Faye Wattleton confirmed this in the Los Angeles Times, on October 17, 1986: “[Planned Parenthood is] not going to be an organization promoting celibacy or chastity.”

The current PP president, Pamela Maraldo, in an article in the March/April 1993 issue of Family Planning World, condemned abstinence-only sex ed programs as “unacceptable.” She endorsed, instead, the position of former United States Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders, who said, “We’ve taught our children in driver’s education what to do in the front seat, and now we’ve got to teach them what to do in the back seat.”

PP SPREADS RELIGION OF HUMANISM

Planned Parenthood is dedicated to spreading the religious doctrine of Humanism as defined in the Humanist Manifestos (I & II).

PP has consistently refused to give our children a clear message of “right” and “wrong.” It seeks not to educate our children in moral values, but to indoctrinate them into the Humanist philosophy that proclaims there is no objective moral code, and that right and wrong can be decided solely by the individual.

In the Los Angeles Times article quoted above, Faye Wattleton said, “[Planned Parenthood’s] concern is not to convey ‘shoulds’ or ‘should nots.’”

Fearing that moral people on school boards may lead to schools teaching our young children right from wrong, Pamela Maraldo said, in the article referred to above, “...we must bring an immediate halt to the aggressive infiltration of local school boards by the religious right.”

Any school program endorsed by Planned Parenthood will give children complete information on how to have sex. The children will be given no moral guidance in a PP program and will be told they can do it or not do it depending on how they feel. While this concept of no absolute rights or wrongs may be embraced by some people in the world, it is rejected by most. Most people subscribe to religious principles that recognize a supreme authority over life and a set of divinely inspired principles on which our behavior must be conditioned. Parents who support STOPP are among this latter group and, therefore, oppose all PP programs for teens.

PP POSES A DANGER TO WOMEN

Planned Parenthood runs a business providing birth control devices to its customers. Although PP is officially a non-profit organization, IRS regulations allow it to make profits on parts of its operation. PP does make a profit on its sale of birth control devices and seems to operate more to protect that income than its clients.

A primary example of this is their provision of birth control pills. The Pill has long been a major income producer for PP.

At the Third Annual AIDS Conference in Washington in June 1987, Dr. Frank Plummer of the Kenya Medical Institute reported that oral contraceptive users appear to be less resistant to AIDS than non-users. Still PP refused to get teenage girls and others off the Pill.

Then, Family Planning Perspectives (Vol. 25, No. 6, p. 243) reported: “Women who are seropositive for the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and use the pill are more likely than nonusers to have HIV present in their cervical secretions, and may be more likely to infect their sexual partners.” The AGI story goes on to say: “The presence of HIV in cervical secretions was nearly 12 times as likely among pill users as among non-users.”

Still, PP refused to tell its customers to get off the Pill to reduce the risk of AIDS. If PP were really concerned about women, it would stop selling the Pill. However, this would mean about an $85,000,000 decrease in PP income.

This same disregard for women can also be seen in Planned Parenthood’s handling of the Norplant problem. In 1993 and 1994, numerous lawsuits were filed by Norplant users over the side effects of the implants and the difficulty of removal. Yet PP not only continues to make this device available, it still implants it in minors without parental knowledge.

Continue to page 2