1. Eugenics

Category Archives: Eugenics

Tennessee Tells You You Have to Have Kids, Nashville Tells You You Can't

Posted on by

ADA Brian Holmgren is making the media rounds, trying to defend his informal eugenics program, first by talking to Steven Hale here at the Scene and then Stacey Barchenger over at the Tennessean.

Both stories are well worth your time to read, especially if you're interested in the kind of mindset that lets a man commit grave evils while wholly convinced he's making the right decision.

See this part of Hale's story to get a sense of it:

"And I will argue vehemently that absolutely, having people on birth control in those circumstances is an appropriate condition of probation if they want to be out in the community."

And sterilization?

"If the woman chooses to have that procedure done because she feels it's in her best interest to do that, she doesn't want to have more children, that's an appropriate thing for her to do," he said. "But I can't remember a single case where that has been a proposal that we made that the only way you're going to get probation is if you have a tubal ligation."

To me, it seems obvious that Holmgren is manipulating and pressuring women into having invasive surgery. Again, in plain English, we are not supposed to inflict pain on people as part of their punishment and surgery and the recovery from it is painful. We also aren't supposed to alter the condition and function of someone's body as a punishment, even if it's not painful. Those things are not allowed in the rules we agree to play by as a society.

But, he seems to think he knows better than them what they should do with their bodies and he's going to use the weight of the State to make them do it.

And what a coincidence, there was State Rep. Rick Womick going to the Black Caucus to talk to them about how black women are too stupid to make decisions about what to do with their bodies.

From the AP:

Continue reading here:

Tennessee Tells You You Have to Have Kids, Nashville Tells You You Can't

Chemtrails Geoengineering Eugenics Evolution through the Stars – Video

Posted on by


Chemtrails Geoengineering Eugenics Evolution through the Stars
http://www.frederickwust.com/ http://frederickwust.wordpress.com/ https://www.youtube.com/user/frederickwust https://www.facebook.com/groups/chemtrailsla/ The Seven Plagues are raining down...

By: Frederick Wst Jr.

View original post here:

Chemtrails Geoengineering Eugenics Evolution through the Stars - Video

NC Senator wants compensation for victims of county-ordered sterilization

Posted on by

RALEIGH, NC (WECT) - More people may have been forcibly sterilized in North Carolina than originally estimated. A Charlotte-area lawmaker is proposing compensation for people who were involuntarily sterilized by orders of their county, and not necessarily by the now-defunct Eugenics Board.

Sen. Jeff Jackson (D-Mecklenberg) introduced a bill (SB 532) to have victims forcibly sterilized under orders of a county eligible under the state's Eugenics Compensation Program. The Eugenics Program in North Carolina ran from 1929 to 1974, when the state ordered mandatory sterilization of thousands of individuals, many considered feeble-minded or mentally retarded by the Eugenics Board. Estimated say more than 7,600 people were forcibly sterilized before the program ended.

The North Carolina Industrial Commission confirmed 220 victims of state-ordered sterilization, and in October 2014 sent checks of $20,000 to those individuals. Those victims are due to receive a second compensation payment in 2015, after appeals are decided on any pending claims. Sen. Jackson's bill would make victims sterilized under a county's authority eligible to receive a payment at that time.

There are victims who were sterilized on order of the county, working in coordination with the state, Sen. Jackson said. People came to me with some instances of this taking place. They applied to the Industrial Commission and were turned down.

Jackson estimated there to be less than 100 victims in this situation.

Bob Bollinger, an attorney in Charlotte, is representing several of these victims.

We found quite a few people got sterilized at the instigation of the local welfare department, but they had no paperwork with the (state) Eugenics Board, said Bollinger.

Bollinger recounted one case of a 28-year-old woman with four children. She was receiving welfare after her husband had left the family. The local welfare department said she needed to be sterilized. According to Bollinger, officials even sent a worker to take the woman to the hospital for the procedure. These are the kind of cases that Sen. Jackson's amendment is trying to help, said Bollinger.

Sen. Jackson said getting lawmakers in the General Assembly to support and pass his bill will be a difficult task. Many (lawmakers) are reluctant to revisit this issue because of how heated it became last time, said Sen. Jackson, who is serving his first full term after being selected in 2014 to serve out the remainder of Sen. Dan Clodfelter's term. This is something that you have to rally support for. This will take some time.

To read Senate Bill 532 click here:http://bit.ly/1xPLD5E

See the original post here:

NC Senator wants compensation for victims of county-ordered sterilization

Bill aims to close eugenics 'loophole'

Posted on by

A state senator from Mecklenburg County has filed a bill what would open up the last round of eugenics compensation payments to victims who were involuntarily sterilized by counties.

The state has already sent out a first round of payments to victims who were sterilized by the state eugenics board, and a second and final round of payments is set to go out later this year.

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Best Value

Get home delivery of the newspaper every day. Plus receive digital access, which includesunlimited use of JournalNow.com on web and mobile web as well as our electronic replica edition.

Get home delivery of the newspaper Monday - Saturday. Plus receive digital access, which includesunlimited use of JournalNow.com on web and mobile web as well as our electronic replica edition.

Get home delivery of the newspaper Saturday - Monday. Plus receive digital access, which includesunlimited use of JournalNow.com on web and mobile web as well as our electronic replica edition.

Get home delivery of the Sunday newspaper. Plus receive digital access, which includesunlimited use of JournalNow.com on web and mobile web as well as our electronic replica edition.

Receive unlimited web and mobile web access to JournalNow.com and get an electronic replica edition every day.

(Per 30 days)

See the rest here:

Bill aims to close eugenics 'loophole'

Geoengineering Chemtrails Poisons by Air Eugenics SRM Sirrus is ISIS – Video

Posted on by


Geoengineering Chemtrails Poisons by Air Eugenics SRM Sirrus is ISIS
http://www.frederickwust.com/ http://frederickwust.wordpress.com/ https://www.youtube.com/user/frederickwust https://www.facebook.com/groups/chemtrailsla/ The Seven Plagues are raining down...

By: Frederick Wst Jr.

Read more:

Geoengineering Chemtrails Poisons by Air Eugenics SRM Sirrus is ISIS - Video

Corrupt CDC EXPOSED: Vaccine-Induced Autism Cover Up and Modern Eugenics – Video

Posted on by


Corrupt CDC EXPOSED: Vaccine-Induced Autism Cover Up and Modern Eugenics
Click #39;Show More #39; for numerous important corroborating links. Dr. Stephanie Seneff #39;s site with her bio and pdf downloads of her studies available: http://people.csail.mit.edu/seneff/ 30 SCIENTIFIC...

By: William Tyndale

See the original post:

Corrupt CDC EXPOSED: Vaccine-Induced Autism Cover Up and Modern Eugenics - Video

Modern food eugenics – fake sugar cancer causing food drug saccharin sodium bicarbonate , silicon – Video

Posted on by


Modern food eugenics - fake sugar cancer causing food drug saccharin sodium bicarbonate , silicon
Modern food eugenics - fake sugar cancer causing food drug saccharin sodium bicarbonate , silicon dioxide modified cellulose gum and povidone #news #world #science #food #cooking #travel ...

By: PhiladelphiaFinalCut

View post:

Modern food eugenics - fake sugar cancer causing food drug saccharin sodium bicarbonate , silicon - Video

Why Breeding Pedigree Dogs Is Just Eugenics By Another Name

Posted on by

Eugenics is the now-defunct (and creepy!) practice of breeding supposedly superior humans to achieve genetic improvements while sterilizing undesirables. Sound familiar? It's the exact same thing we now do to dogs and it's responsible for a range of health and behavioral issues in them. Ed.

This chapter is excerpted from "A Matter of Breeding: A Biting History of Pedigree Dogs and How the Quest for Status Has Harmed Man's Best Friend" by Michael Brandow (Beacon Press, 2015 ). Reprinted with permission from Beacon Press.

Does a dog need to have a certain look to behave in a certain way? Seeking some explanation for our present-day obsession with predictability, many are surprised to find the trail leads back to eugenics, that dirty word recalled with fear and loathing but a set of assumptions that have as much to do with pets as they once did with people. Few know that many of our core beliefs about bloodlines, appearance, and skill retain more than a tinge of those ugly theories that have made some people and pets seem superior for their complexion or ancestral profiles, and others inferior for having substandard markings or a checkered past.

Most upright citizens have officially sworn off applying eugenics to humans these days, but for some strange reason, they continue to breed and buy their dogs along old eugenic lines. Anderson Cooper was shocked and appalled on his show in May 2012 to report that forced sterilizations of "undesirables" were conducted by the tens of thousands in the United States until as recently as the 1970s. [1] But at home, he had a Welsh springer spaniel, a breed born to what AKC writer Freeman Lloyd once called "a doggie family that has existed in its approximately pure state for many hundreds of generations." [2] Despite its illustrious past, Cooper's brand of choice is now prone to a number of serious health issues and has an average inbreeding coefficient higher than that of first cousins. [3] Blood "purity" has worked against the springer, which has been subjected, like many breeds, to the same outdated theories of "better breeding" that get pups culled for having the wrong coat color, make "good" families feel superior to not-so-good onesand get millions of innocent people killed for their ethnic or racial background. Sterilization, euthanasia, segregation, holocausts, and judgments at Westminster all have a common heritage in eugenics, and despite the fact that English isn't among the many languages that still use "race" and "breed" interchangeably, we have no excuse for not knowing or caring about this history.

Terrible but true: who among us, at one time or another, hasn't been guilty of stereotyping? And who among us has never let looks determine likability? Old biases aren't easy to shed. Perhaps the most obvious crime against progressive thinking can be found in our own backyards, where it's still socially acceptable to say, "I have a chocolate Lab at home," but not, "I only hire Latino/black/Asian/fillin-the-blank maids because they clean better." Why is "We grew up with two goldens" in fashion, but "We've adopted a pair of Orientals" is not? What's wrong with "I have a dog" or "Two dogs are better than one?" I myself have no degree in statistics but question the myth that all pedigree German shepherds are loyal, smart, and trainable because one in a million qualifies for service work. Not all golden retrievers are heroes because one was depicted with a fireman at Ground Zero in a painting that hangs in the AKC's art collection, no more than all Americans are champion athletes because Michael Phelps won some gold medals.

The "science" of eugenics was founded in the mid-nineteenth century as a tool for keeping people in their proper places. "It is, too, a strange fact," wrote Gordon Stables, a firm believer in head shape as an indicator of character, "that the more highly civilised a nation is, the greater its care and culture of the canine race." [4] Based on a similar observation that fair-skinned folk with certain anatomical features were supposedly more attractive and intelligent than "darkies" (too repugnant, many thought, even to serve food on First-Class dining cars), eugenics devised an elaborate and complex system of color coding and measurement, an apparatus that grew more elaborate and complex with time. Focusing on a somewhat selective selection of mostly random and coincidental characteristics that conquerors and ruling classes had haphazardly amassed along their uphill climbs, traits certain groups just happened to share, such as blond hair, blue eyes, a taste for classical music, or a fondness for fox huntingby-products of generations of inbreeding and upbringing only with their own kindeugenic investigators compiled an exhaustive catalog of hair-splitting nuances to prove that races were, indeed, separate and unique. Some races, they felt, were essentially better than others, and mixing racesor "mongrelization"was unhealthy and probably dangerous to all races involved.

The eugenic inventory of racial indicators grew so encompassing and complex that experts managed to convince many that their observations simply had to be true, if only because, it was thought, no sane person would have observed them if they weren't. The subtleties of human skin tone, the way the eyes were set into the head, the precise angle at which the jaw protruded, neck length, hair texture, nose curvaturethe convolution of spirals in brain matter, the spaces between the toes, the distance between the navel and the penisevery detail was carefully gauged and painstakingly documented, then compared and contrasted in ways that somehow always seemed the most flattering to white, Northern Europeans and their white, Northern European descendants across the Atlantic (or people who looked like them). Superficial distinctions were exaggerated to the point that different racial or ethnic groups were said to have descended from separate prehistoric ancestors, a theory only recently disproved by DNA, not unlike the freshly debunked myth that not all dogs evolved from wolves. Embellished bloodlines based on outward appearance, and a rudimentary understanding of genetics that made heredity seem as simple as pigmentation in guinea pigs, were used to explain deeper character traits like morality, criminality, intelligence, and "feeblemindedness." Before long, eugenics had just about every aspect of human diversity neatly mapped, categorized, and evaluated based on looks or social ties. Anatomical and behavioral traits, even personal quirks, were correlated to family, class, race, and ethnic background, or to whether a person ended up working as a banker, baker, soldier, stenographer, poet, or piano tuner. Eugenics explained it all: infertility, spelling, dancing, neatness, insanity, gambling, gout, disobedience, double-jointedness, punctuality, "pug" noses on ill-born Irish, even ball playing. [5]

Among the many errors of eugenics were to misinterpret outward appearance, behavior, and culturally biased test results as indicators of other qualities; to confuse heredity with environment; to overestimate the role of individual genes in the inheritance of complex behaviors; to focus on human pedigrees instead of individuals; and to cling to an archaic belief in inbreeding for blood "purity," already proven as detrimental to half-mad, hemophiliac royal families as it would prove to be for fancy, "scientifically" bred dogs in the century to come.

Like so many attempts at improvement in the nineteenth century, eugenics dressed old habits in new garb. Ancient, quasi-mystical arts of physiognomy and phrenology, and a more recent discipline called craniometry, went into these dazzling demonstrations of mental gymnastics. What eugenics brought to the table was a protective layer of statistics and documents, modern additions of the nineteenth century that lent authenticity to the usual slants on race, class, and any other basis for bias. The arcane assumption that head shape indicated personality or intelligence was now provable with an extensive set of precise measurements. Skulls could finally be placed side-by-side in glass display cases at natural history museums as updated reliquaries to be interpreted as eugenic high priests saw fit. Primitive, gut reactions against outsiders and oddballs because of the way they looked, acted, or dressed now had the blessing of observations showing darker-skinned people did, in fact, tend to be dishonestbecause they didn't blush, which they couldn't, at least not visibly, being darker-skinnedincontrovertible proof that they were born with something to hide. In the same vein, the medieval notion of "blue blood," based on the fact that bloodlines tended to be more visible on fair-skinned aristocrats than on darker-skinned workers, Africans, Jews, or Arabswhose own blue veins were, indeed, less visible because they had darker skinnow had the blessing of a host of new parameters for defining race and inevitably showing fair-skinned testers in the fairest light. National types, patriots declared confidently, could now be clearly defined and separated from outsiders"race," until quite recently, meaning national origingiving them carte blanche to discriminate at home and dominate abroad through conquest and colonialism. [6]

Read more here:

Why Breeding Pedigree Dogs Is Just Eugenics By Another Name

Scientists want DNA-changing tests on human embryos, eggs stopped

Posted on by

NEW YORK With rumors that scientists are about to announce they have modified the genes of human eggs, sperm, or embryos, five prominent researchers on Thursday called on biologists to halt such experiments due to fears about safety and eugenics.

The call for a self-imposed research moratorium, which is extremely rare in science, was based on concerns that the work crosses an ethical line, said Edward Lanphier, president and chief executive officer of California-based Sangamo BioSciences Inc., senior author of the commentary published in the science journal Nature.

Humans are not rats or other (experimental) organisms, and this is not something we want to do, Lanphier said in an interview. The research should stop.

Rumors that one or more labs are on the verge of genetically-engineering a human embryo have swirled for months, he said.

Critics of the work say the experiments could be used to try to alter the genetic quality of humans, a practice and belief known as eugenics.

At least two technologies, one called CRISPR and the other known as zinc-finger nucleases, can genetically modify a human embryo. They act as what an article last week in the MIT magazine Technology Review, cited by the Nature authors, called a kind of search-and-replace tool to alter DNA, even down to the level of a single letter.

Experiments have been planned or are underway using the technology on human eggs or embryos, Technology Review reported, to correct genetic defects such as those causing cystic fibrosis or in the BRCA1 breast-cancer gene.

But existing and developing methods can allow parents who carry identified genetic illnesses to keep their children from inheriting them, the Nature authors argued, and genome-editing can itself introduce DNA errors, meaning that the precise effects of genetic modification to an embryo may be impossible to know until after birth. Even then, potential problems may not surface for years.

In theory, genes associated with intelligence, appearance and other nonmedical traits could also be edited into or out of embryos, eggs or sperm.

Genome-editing is being developed to treat HIV/AIDS, some forms of cancer, and other illnesses by altering genes in, say, adults white blood cells. Sangamo is conducting clinical trials of genome editing as a cure for HIV/AIDS that will allow patients to stop taking antiretroviral drugs.

Original post:

Scientists want DNA-changing tests on human embryos, eggs stopped


  1. Eugenics