JUST IN: Pastor Stuns Liberals With Powerful Demand – Media Wants It Hidden

As elected officials bow to social justice pressure by removing Confederate statues to avoid offending liberals, history shows that few politicians will act to remove statues that are considered offensive to conservatives.

According to Life News, in 2015 several African American pastors demanded that the Smithsonian remove a bust of an individual known for forming an organization that has committed mass murder and participated in eugenics. The individual is Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.

The bust of Sanger is found in the “Struggle for Justice” exhibit in the Smithsonian. Pieces included in the exhibit are meant to represent those who were “champions of justice.” Sanger was supposedly included because she was “profoundly affected by the physical and mental toll exacted on women by frequent childbirth, miscarriage and self-induced abortion.”

Her presence at the museum has sparked massive controversy amongst conservatives who point to the woman’s racist participation in eugenics as a way to weed out African Americans and the infirm from society.

One of Sanger’s books, Woman & the New Race, points to her disturbing belief that African Americans and children born into poverty should be aborted to avoid tainting the population. “[We should] apply a stern and rigid policy of sterilization and segregation to that grade of population whose progeny is tainted, or whose inheritance is such that objectionable traits may be transmitted to offspring,” Sanger wrote.

Star Parker, a pro-life advocate said, “Margaret Sanger is a racist who wanted to end the black population through birth control and abortion. She founded Planned Parenthood. But the Smithsonian, funded by our tax dollars, celebrates this woman, even mentioning her advocacy of eugenics! They don’t even hide it! It is breathtaking in its idiocy.”

Parker referred to the statement the Smithsonian issued after the request for the statue’s removal was sent. Smithsonian Director, Kim Sajet stated, “I received your letter regarding the legacy of Margaret Sanger and respectfully decline to remove her portrait from the museum. The ‘Struggle for Justice’ gallery brings attention to major cultural and political figures from the 19th century to the present day who fought to achieve civil rights for disenfranchised or marginalized groups.”

She mentioned that the controversial history of eugenics shouldn’t be judged by today’s society in the statement, “Her association with the eugenics movement shadowed her achievements in sex education and contraception, making her a figure of controversy, one whose complexities and contradictions mirror her times. There is no ‘moral test’ for people to be accepted into the National Portrait Gallery.”

Despite the involvement of GOP Senators like Ted Cruz (R-TX), the statue remains in the Smithsonian to this day as part of the exhibit, according to the Smithsonian website.

What’s upsetting about this is that statues considered offensive to liberals are removed to avoid violent demonstrations, such as the case with the Confederate statues in Baltimore, as reported by The New York Times. However, those offensive to conservatives remain standing because there’s no risk of a violent protest.

What does this say to members of our society, when the demands of the violent are granted while the desires of the peaceful remain ignored? If politicians see wisdom in removing statues to avoid offending liberals, then shouldn’t there be similar concessions to conservatives?

The Smithsonian declined a request to remove a bust of eugenicist Margaret Sanger. Should conservatives demand that offensive monuments be removed?

Why is the founder of Planned Parenthood, an organization that literally kills unborn infants and sells their parts, who was determined to be a promoter of eugenics for race control, considered less offensive than a soldier fighting for state’s rights and sovereignty of government?

Politicians in our society need to be careful they are not inadvertently promoting violence by bowing to the will of liberals in an effort to avoid their hostility. To do so is to promote and facilitate, and even advance, anarchy.