Talk:Margaret Sanger

Michael Crichton, is an author of fiction and a non-practicing MD—is he really a proper source for historical quotes? I think not. I would, therefore, argue in favor of removing the last paragraph from this page unless better sourcing for these quotes can be found.--Reginod 10:17, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

That's the kind of censorship I came here to avoid. Wikipedians made the same argument, but I don't buy it.

On what grounds do you reject the quote?

1. Writing fiction discredits all non-fiction written by an author.
   • Bio-chemist (and science fiction author) Isaac Asimov wrote a History of Chemistry which I read as a teen. Bad source, right?
2. When an MD stops practicing or never even starts, he forgets everything he learned at university and his degree becomes worthless.

In your reply, please refer to the numbered list above. --Ed Poor 10:41, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

First, I am not censoring anything – Michael Crichton’s views are appropriate to place on his entry, I am simply suggesting he is not a good source for Margaret Sanger’s views, I didn’t delete the quote I simply asked that someone justify Crichton as a source or that a better source for the quote be found or that the quote be removed. So please do not accuse me of censorship. If I were a censor I would have simply deleted the quote and moved on.

As to your points I do not reject the quote for either of the reasons you suggest that I am rejecting the quotes. I am saying the two qualifications Chichton has are popular fiction author and non-practicing MD—this means that he would be a good source on writing, the publishing industry, how to provide publicity for a book (etc.), and he would be a good source for those things one would learn in earning an MD during the time period he was earning his MD (this rules out, for example, modern practice in dealing with premature births as that technology has greatly changed since he earned his degree—but does not rule out how to set a broken arm). What Sanger said is not in his area of expertise, not in either of them.

So I am rejecting the quote for reason number 3 (not 1 or 2—both of which, you are quite right are bad reasons to reject a statement):

3. What Margaret Sanger said is not in Michael Chrichton’s field of expertise and he, therefore, is not a proper source for what she said.

If she said what Chrichton claims she did a better source can be found, if a better source cannot be found it should be removed. --Reginod 10:57, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

Thanks for taking the time to clarify your remarks. Returning the favor, let me point out that I do not consider you a "censor" - I was perhaps unclear about that. I meant that removing the quote 'would be' censorship.

I appreciate you listing your grounds for removal of this passage:

According to Michael Crichton, Sanger was a supporter of eugenics. He quotes her as having said, "Fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good is an extreme cruelty … there is no greater curse to posterity than that of bequeathing them an increasing population of imbeciles."

Crichton also writes that 'She spoke of the burden of caring for "this dead weight of human waste."'

But "not in Michael Chrichton’s field of expertise" doesn't seem like a good enough reason. Everything in the passage is easily checked. Would you like to dig into this matter, and tell us whether Crichton was right and/or whether I've cited him properly?

The points in question are:

1. Was Margaret Sanger a supporter of eugenics?
2. Did she say "Fostering the good-for-nothing at the expense of the good is an extreme cruelty … there is no greater curse to posterity than that of bequeathing them an increasing population of imbeciles."?
   • And is this quote taken in context or out of context?

If you've got time, we could sure use your help on this. It could even turn into a guideline on Use of quoted material. :-) --Ed Poor 11:12, 2 April 2007 (EDT)

1. That Margaret Sanger