Margaret
Sanger: "The Morality of Birth Control"
delivered
The meeting tonight is a postponement of one
which was to have taken place at the Town Hall last Sunday evening. It was to
be a culmination of a three day conference, two of which were held at the
The one issue upon which there seems to be
most uncertainty and disagreement exists in the moral side of the subject of
Birth Control. It seemed only natural
for us to call together scientists, educators, members of the medical
profession and the theologians of all denominations to ask their opinion upon
this uncertain and important phase of the controversy. Letters were sent to the
most eminent men and women in the world. We asked in this letter, the following
questions:
1. Is over-population a menace to the peace
of the world?
2. Would the legal dissemination of
scientific Birth Control information through the medium of clinics by the
medical profession be the most logical method of checking the problem of
over-population?
3. Would knowledge of Birth Control change
the moral attitude of men and women toward the marriage bond or lower the moral
standards of the youth of the country?
4. Do you believe that knowledge which
enables parents to limit the families will make for human happiness, and raise
the moral, social and intellectual standards of population?
We sent such a letter not only to those who,
we thought, might agree with us, but we sent it also to our known
opponents. Most of these people
answered. Every one who answered did so
with sincerity and courtesy, with the exception of one group whose reply to
this important question as demonstrated at the Town Hall last Sunday evening was
a disgrace to liberty-loving people, and to all traditions we hold dear in the
When one speaks of moral, one refers to human
conduct. This implies action of many kinds, which in turn depends upon the mind
and the brain. So that in speaking of morals one must remember that there is a
direct connection between morality and brain development. Conduct is said to be
action in pursuit of ends, and if this is so, then we must hold the
irresponsibility and recklessness in our action is immoral, while
responsibility and forethought put into action for the benefit of the
individual and the race becomes in the highest sense the finest kind of
morality.
We know that every advance that woman has
made in the last half century has been made with opposition, all of which has
been based upon the grounds of immorality.
When women fought for higher education, it was said that this would
cause her to become immoral and she would lose her place in the sanctity of the
home. When women asked for the franchise
it was said that this would lower her standard of morals, that it was not fit
that she should meet with and mix with the members of the opposite sex, but we
notice that there was no objection to her meeting with the same members of the
opposite sex when she went to church.
The church has ever opposed the progress of
woman on the ground that her freedom would lead to immorality. We ask the
church to have more confidence in women. We ask the opponents of this movement
to reverse the methods of the church, which aims to keep women moral by keeping
them in fear and in ignorance, and to inculcate into them a higher and truer
morality based upon knowledge. And ours is the morality of knowledge. If we
cannot trust woman with the knowledge of her own body, then I claim that two
thousand years of Christian teaching has proved to be a failure.
We stand on the principle that Birth Control
should be available to every adult man and woman. We believe that every adult man and woman should
be taught the responsibility and the right use of knowledge. We claim that woman should have the right
over her own body and to say if she shall or if she shall not be a mother, as
she sees fit. We further claim that the first right of a child is to be
desired. While the second right is that it should be conceived in love, and the
third, that it should have a heritage of sound health.
Upon these principles the Birth Control
movement in
Our first step is to have the
backing of the medical profession so that our laws may be changed, so that
motherhood may be the function of dignity and choice, rather than one of
ignorance and chance. Conscious control of offspring is now becoming the ideal
and the custom in all civilized countries. Those who oppose it claim that
however desirable it may be on economic or social grounds, it may be abused and
the morals of the youth of the country may be lowered. Such people should be reminded that there are
two points to be considered. First, that
such control is the inevitable advance in civilization. Every civilization involves an increasing
forethought for others, even for those yet unborn. The reckless abandonment of the impulse of
the moment and the careless regard for the consequences,
is not morality. The selfish gratification of temporary desire at the expense
of suffering to lives that will come may seem very beautiful to some, but it is
not our conception of civilization, or is it our concept of morality.
In the second place, it is not only
inevitable, but it is right to control the size of the family for by this
control and adjustment we can raise the level and the standards of the human
race. While Nature’s way of reducing her
numbers is controlled by disease, famine and war, primitive man has achieved the
same results by infanticide, exposure of infants, the abandonment of children,
and by abortion. But such ways of
controlling population is no longer possible for us. We have attained high standards of life, and
along the lines of science must we conduct such control. We must begin farther back and control the
beginnings of life. We must control
conception. This is a better method, it is a more civilized method, for it involves not
only greater forethought for others, but finally a higher sanction for the
value of life itself.
Society is divided into three groups. Those intelligent and
wealthy members of the upper classes who have obtained knowledge of Birth
Control and exercise it in regulating the size of their families. They have already benefited by this
knowledge, and are today considered the most respectable and moral members of
the community. They have only children when they desire, and all society points
to them as types that should perpetuate their kind.
The second group is equally intelligent and
responsible. They desire to control the
size of their families, but are unable to obtain knowledge or to put such
available knowledge into practice.
The third are those irresponsible and
reckless ones having little regard for the consequence of their acts, or whose
religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased,
feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent entirely upon the normal
and fit members of society for their support.
There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the
procreation of this group should be stopped. For if they are not able to
support and care for themselves, they should certainly not be allowed to bring
offspring into this world for others to look after. We do not believe that
filling the earth with misery, poverty and disease is moral. And it is our desire and intention to carry
on our crusade until the perpetuation of such conditions has ceased.
We desire to stop at its source the disease,
poverty and feeble-mindedness and insanity which exist today, for these lower
the standards of civilization and make for race deterioration. We know that the masses of people are growing
wiser and are using their own minds to decide their individual conduct. The more people of this kind we have, the
less immorality shall exist. For the
more responsible people grow, the higher do they and
shall they attain real morality.
Research Note: Source of original: The Margaret
Sanger Papers, Sophia Smith Collection at
From: http://www.americanrhetoric.com/speeches/margaretsangermoralityofbirthcontrol.htm