American Infanticide: The Return of Eugenics?

babyreachingforhandfromwomb2Yesterday, Lisa Rose and her anti-abortion group, Live Action, released the second in a series of videos, shot in abortion clinics, without the employees’ knowledge.

The first video, released Sunday, shows an worker in a clinic in the Bronx saying the clinic would put the baby in a jar of “solution” that would cause it to stop breathing. According to Marjana Banzil, director of the Bronx clinic, she had not viewed the video but that any employee who would say such a thing was misinformed.

The second video, released yesterday, features a doctor in Washington, DC, Cesare Santangelo, who said that if an abortion resulted in a live birth, “we would not help it.” Santangelo was answering the questions of an undercover Live Action Operative about what would happen, hypothetically, if she gave birth after an unsuccessful abortion.

“I mean, technically, you know, legally, we would be obligated to help it, you know, to survive, but . . . it probably wouldn’t,” Santangelo is shown telling the woman, who was 24 weeks pregnant. “It’s all in how vigorously you do things to help a fetus survive at this point.”

Live Action president Lila Rose said the group’s videos expose “truly gruesome, illegal and inhuman practices.” She defended the tactics, saying undercover investigations are a powerful method to expose abuses.

In an interview with The Washington Post, Santangelo said he was trying to reassure the woman, who turned out to be an undercover operative of the group, Live Action. In reality, he said, he would call 9-1-1. But he said he stands by what he said on tape.

“What I said is, basically I wouldn’t do anything extraordinary,” he said Saturday. “We would call EMS. We would call 9-1-1. But I wouldn’t do intubation or anything. . . . You let nature take its course.”

With the callous attitude of Liberals and our self-centered society in general, how long will it be until single women and couples start aborting babies who have Downs Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, or some other genetic disorder?

In other words, how long before Americans start practicing eugenics? After all, it has been tried in America before…

The term eugenics comes from the Greek roots for “good” and “generation” or “origin” and was first used to refer to the “science” of heredity and good breeding in about 1883.

Within 20 years, the word was widely used by scientists who had rediscovered the work of Gregor Mendel. Mendel had meticulously recorded the results of cross-breeding pea plants, and found a very regular statistical pattern for features like height and color. This introduced the concept of genes, opening the field of genetics to a tumultuous century of research. One path of genetic research branched off into the shadows of social theory, and in the first quarter of the twentieth century became immensely popular as eugenics. It was presented as a mathematical science that could be used to predict the traits and behaviors of humans, and in a perfect world, to control human breeding so that people with the best genes would reproduce and thus improve the species. It was an optimistic school of thought with a profound faith in the powers of Science.

The trappings of science, anyway. Even in its day, many people saw that eugenics was a dubious discipline, riddled with inconsistencies. But it was championed by a very prominent and respected biologist, Charles Davenport, and its conclusions told many people what they wanted to hear: that certain “racial stock” was superior to others in such traits as intelligence, hard work, cleanliness, and so on. In this view of human behavior, the work of Sigmund Freud was disregarded, while the ideas of behaviorism were just gaining ground.

Local eugenics societies and groups sprang up around the United States after World War I, with names like the Race Betterment Foundation. The war had given many Americans a greater fear of foreigners, and immigration to the United States was still increasing. In 1923, organizers founded the American Eugenics Society, and it quickly grew to 29 chapters around the country. At fairs and exhibitions, eugenicists spread the word and hosted “fitter family” and “better baby” competitions to award blue ribbons to the finest human stock — not unlike the awards for prize bull and biggest pumpkin. Not only did eugenicists promote better breeding, they wanted to prevent poor breeding or the risk of it. That meant keeping people with undesireable traits in their heritage (including alcoholism, pauperism, or epilepsy) separate from others or, where law allowed, preventing them from reproducing.

These vocal groups advocated laws to attain their aims, and in 1924, the Immigration Act was passed by majorities in the U.S. House and Senate. It set up strict quotas limiting immigrants from countries believed by eugenicists to have “inferior” stock, particularly Southern Europe and Asia. President Coolidge, who signed the bill into law, had stated when he was vice president, “America should be kept American. . . . Biological laws show that Nordics deteriorate when mixed with other races.”

Behaviorism was introduced in 1913, and the genetic work of Thomas Hunt Morgan and others became known through the ‘teens. After World War I, few scientists joined the ranks of the eugenicists. As the weight of the scientific community shifted toward behaviorism and true genetics, popular opinion followed. John Watson’s articles about childrearing and self-improvement popularized behaviorism still further. The eugenics craze was already fading when the horrors of institutionalized eugenics revealed in Nazi Germany during World War II doused it entirely as a movement.

The leader of the new liberalism movement of the early 20th century was a fellow named Herbert Croly. He wrote a book in 1909 titled “The Promise of American Life,” in which he emphatically stated that the state must, “interfere on behalf of the really fittest.”

Eugenics was a popular topic of discussion among President Woodrow Wilson, Teddy Roosevelt and their advisers. In fact, in 1912, a year before he was elected president, as New Jersey’s governor, Woodrow Wilson created a board of examiners of feeble-minded, epileptics and other defectives.

Under the auspices of this board, the state could make the decision as to, “when procreation is inadvisable like for criminals, prisoners, poor kids and the ill-defined, other defectives.”

According to Teddy Roosevelt’s close adviser, Charles Van Hise,

He who thinks of himself not primarily, but of his race and of its future, is the new patriot. Former President Roosevelt later endorsed Madison Grant’s “The Passing of the Great Race,” a book that Hitler once referred to as his bible.

As the father of a special young lady, who will be 26 in July, even knowing that she was going to face challenges,my wife and I decided not to abort her.

 I am a Christian American, and I happen to have been born prematurely myself, due to health issues.

You may believe that I am worrying needlessly. Don’t you remember that President Barack Hussein Obama once said that he did not want his daughters “punished with a baby”?

Is it too hard to believe that this practice that the Liberals are so voraciously defending, which murders the innocent while still in the womb, will eventually be extended to ensure “Genetic Perfection”?

Humans playing God. Didn’t the novelist Marry Shelley write about this subject?

And, we know how that turned out. That monster only destroyed his creator. This monster will eventually destroy a whole nation.

Until He Comes,

KJ

About these ads

Tags: , , , , , , ,

6 Responses to “American Infanticide: The Return of Eugenics?”

  1. Gohawgs Says:

    “…how long will it be until single woman and couples start aborting babies who have Downs Syndrome, Cerebral Palsy, or some other genetic disorder?”

    Already happening…

    “…how long before Americans start practicing eugenics? After all, it has been tried in America before…”

    Sanger, Kellogg, Planned Parenthood, et al have been doing so for 100 years…

    The Hitler crowd is proud of what they’ve be able to accomplish under the guise of women’s health…

  2. khariscourtney Says:

    How interesting that one of the doctors said, “you let nature take its course” when the very thing he practices is interfering with nature taking its course. The natural thing is NOT to have an abortion.

  3. cmsinaz Says:

    amen KJ

  4. KOOLAID2 Says:

    You’re becoming my ‘daily read’ KJ.

  5. lovingmyUSA Says:

    “And, we know how that turned out. That monster only destroyed his creator. This monster will eventually destroy a whole nation.”–Just sent chills up my spine…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,575 other followers

%d bloggers like this: