Eugenicist Margaret Sanger stands on the steps of a courthouse in Brooklyn, New York, in 1917.
Is eugenics wrong only when its forced, or is it wrong because its intrinsically wrong?
Abortion and Social Justice was the title of a book edited almost 50 years ago by Thomas Hilgers and Dennis Horan. The title is instructive, because the editors wanted to situate discussion of abortion not as part of sexual ethics or even bioethics but as a social justice question. Nine years ago, ex-priest Thomas Williams returned to the same question, writing about Abortion as a Social Justice Issue and detailing the baneful consequences flowing from the fact that de facto abortion is excluded presently from the realm of Catholic social teaching.
Fifty years ago, abortion was increasingly recognized as a social justice issue, both in terms of the treatment of the unborn and of the conditions and situations that made women believe they needed to resort to abortion. One should remember that back then social liberals including liberal Democrats not only voted against abortion but co-sponsored a constitutional amendment to overturn Roe. William Proxmire, Thomas Eagleton, Harold Hughes and Mark Hatfield were card-carrying liberals. Eagleton was George McGoverns first running mate. (His replacement, Sargent Shriver, was equally pro-life.) Harold Hughes opposed the death penalty in the early 1960s, when opposition to capital punishment was a minority view. Mark Hatfield was half of the Hatfield-McGovern Amendment, an appropriations rider that tried in 1970 to end funding for the Vietnam War. Only Eagleton and Shriver were Catholics. They opposed abortion as a social justice issue.
I underscore the social justice nature of the abortion issue for two reasons. One is that pro-abortionists have sought to capture it for themselves. While the primary defense of abortion rights illustrates what Mary Ann Glendon calls rights talk the rechristening of a policy preference as a right, thereby immunizing its discussion as a normal policy choice and instead elevating it to quasi-sacral status (and demonizing its opponents) some abortionists (Loretta Ross, Kimberly Mutcherson, Laura Salamanca) want to recast abortion as a matter of reproductive justice, with a whole panoply of rights (state subsidy of abortion, no state indications of disapproval of abortion, etc.) following.
My purpose today in recalling abortion as a social justice issue is bound up with an interesting phenomenon: liberal eugenics.
Although the mainstream use of liberal eugenics (as coined by bioethicist Nicholas Agar and promoted by Julian Savulescu et al.) is positive, I want to explore its pejorative understanding. Catalina Devandas-Aguilar has recently noted (no. 21):
Contrary to the eugenics movement, liberal eugenics aims to expand reproductive choices for individuals, including the possibility of genetic enhancement. While there may be no State-sponsored coercive eugenics programmes, in a context of widespread prejudice and discrimination against persons with disabilities, the aggregate effect of many individual choices are likely to produce eugenic outcomes. Indeed, ableist social norms and market pressures make it imperative to have the best possible child with the best possible chances at life. Some utilitarian bioethicists have further argued that genetic enhancement is a moral obligation and that it is ethical to give parents the option to euthanize their newborns with disabilities.
Eugenics writ large tries to use tools to achieved desired biological outcomes. Eugenics got a bad name from Germany because of its coercive nature, e.g., killing the disabled, kidnapping blue-eyed blond Slavic kids for Aryanization, etc. The ill-repute that the Nazis gave eugenics even temporarily put into eclipse its Anglo-American antecedents (vigorously promoted by Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger who, compared to other racists, curiously is still celebrated. We forgot that, in 1935, 28 states had sterilization laws on the books and legislation was introduced in another seven.
Legislation of abortion and, especially, advances in reproductive technologies since the 1970s have led to a eugenic renaissance. Our society is generally too polite to discuss such things openly, but procedures such as artificial insemination and in vitro fertilization (especially when involving donor gametes) and genetic surrogacy can and often do clearly entail eugenic and socio-economic considerations. How else does one explain that, when looking for egg donors, top dollar goes to Ivy League college co-eds, but when seeking gestational surrogates, poorer, even foreign women or Army wives, looking to supplement family incomes, will do?
One of the fundamental shifts in modern ethics is what can be called proceduralism. Because utilitarian and Kantian ethics eschew normative moral judgments (X is wrong because its wrong), preferring moral relativism (X is wrong for me), they instead focus on procedure or format. Have the relevant factors been disclosed? Has informed consent been obtained? If yes, then its OK. If you dont think proceduralism is the driving force in the ethics of medicine, just think of the number of forms you had to initial the last time you visited a doctor, affirming you were told what your treatment involved, you agree to it, you know your privacy rights, your medical information cannot be disclosed but under these conditions, etc. The point is: there is no content here, just procedure. Check the procedural checklist, and youre good to go. Consent validates everything.
That obviously has implications for bioethics.
Is eugenics wrong because its wrong, or is it wrong because it is forced? Was Hitlers crime killing, euthanizing, or sterilizing people or killings, euthanizing, or sterilizing them without their consent? And if in some bizarre world he had gotten their approval, would it have made it right?
This is not a theoretical question. It is very much at the heart of liberal eugenics.
Consider the question of states that try to restrict abortion for eugenic reasons. Indiana was in the U.S. Supreme Court last year over a state law that banned abortion when sought because of the fetus sex or disability. Modern prenatal techniques allow early identification of what sex a baby is and whether the child suffers from any genetic diseases. Note my word: I said identification, not diagnosis.
Why do I make this point? Well, there is no such thing as the wrong sex. (Most politically correct people would not admit it publicly, even if they thought it). So we dont diagnose the babys sex. But it is a motive a substantial motive in some son-centric cultures (India, China, especially under state-enforced child limits) to obtain abortions. And the primary victims of gender-specific abortion are girls because, tidal waves of feminism notwithstanding, residual I want a son biases still exist. Sex-specific abortion cause most pro-abortionists to tie themselves in intellectual knots: how does one defend a procedure that primarily eliminates female unborn children in the name of feminine empowerment?
I also made a point out of identification versus diagnosis, because rarely does an identification of genetic abnormality in an unborn child result in therapeutic intervention, even where possible. The default position in our reification of reproduction has become: defective product, lets eliminate it. Down syndrome, for example, is declining not because it is rarer, but because we abort unborn children identified with it. Some countries will soon be Behindertfrei, disability free because of such abortions.
Liberal thinkers (i.e., those who advocate a permissive procedural ethic) have to face a conundrum: are they abetting eugenics? They manage to evade the question by hewing to laws unscientific position that an unborn child is not a person possessing rights. But it does not relieve the question of the motives of persons seeking such abortions. I want this abortion because the fetus is a girl inherently involves a sexist assumption that, somehow, girls are less valuable than boys. To claim that choice sanitizes the bias is false: in no other case would we say that a preference of a boy over a girl or vice versa is justified exclusively because I prefer it. Why here?
The same problems arise about abortions because of disability. U.S. law prohibits discrimination against persons because they are disabled. Abortionists evade the issue by denying the personhood of the unborn, but they cannot evade the problem of the underlying motivation: that a disabled person is less worthy of life. That is lethal discrimination. That is what Indiana sought to stop.
In Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana the Supreme Court was faced with a case that would have stricken at the central theology of Roe that abortion can entail more than a mothers choice and the Court punted. The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals struck down Indianas ban, Indiana appealed, and the Supreme Court refused to take the appeal, leaving the appeals court ruling intact without comment.
Except for Justice Clarence Thomas. He filed a 21-page opinion, in which he sketched out the lurid history of eugenics in America (including the Supreme Courts infamous and yet unreversed 1927 precedent in Buck v. Bell, upholding Virginias mandatory sterilization law). He closed by insisting that although the Court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever.
Thomas opinion (which is worth reading) cited Adam Cohens book, Imbeciles: The Supreme Court, Eugenics, and the Sterilization of Carrie Buck. Most scholars would be tickled to have their work used by the Supreme Court but, within days, Cohen churned out an article claiming Thomas had misrepresented his work, precisely for the procedural question raised above. Virginias offense was in compulsorily sterilizing Carrie Buck against her familys will; Indianas offense was in not giving parents of a disabled unborn child the choice to abort that child. Note the point: neither eugenically-driven abortion nor sterilization in itself is morally wrong. What is wrong is whether you have a choice about it.
And thats the liberal eugenics Devandas-Aguilar criticizes. The eugenic motives are the same. The eugenic outcomes (elimination of the undesired) are the same. The only difference is whether a choice was involved.
Is it permissible to make eugenic, even discriminatorily motivated choices as long as you can legally pretend their impact is upon a non-person? Does that non-personhood immunize those eugenic, even discriminatorily motivated choices from moral scrutiny? Is eugenics only bad when not a choice?
Read the original here:
Abortion and Social Justice: The Case of 'Liberal Eugenics' - National Catholic Register
- Ridding the Race of His Defective Blood Eugenics in the Journal, 19061948 | NEJM - nejm.org - March 4th, 2024 [March 4th, 2024]
- The Progressive Ideas That Fueled America's Eugenics Movement | Bradley Thomas - Foundation for Economic Education - March 4th, 2024 [March 4th, 2024]
- Few People Know The Real Story About North Carolinas Eugenics Program - Only In Your State - March 4th, 2024 [March 4th, 2024]
- University Art Museums Become Unlikely Homes for These Portraits - The New York Times - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Real-world Influences of Frank Herbert's 'Dune' - Dune News Net - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Everything you don't know about neurodiversity The Mass Media - The Mass Media - October 23rd, 2023 [October 23rd, 2023]
- Details of Japans experiment with eugenic sterilization released - BioEdge - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Give more people with learning disabilities the chance to work ... - EurekAlert - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- 'They Cloned Tyrone' ending explained - Mashable - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Failing Learning Disabled People: The Contradictions of 1945 ... - Byline Times - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- What happened during Marc Tessier-Lavigne's tenure as Stanford ... - Palo Alto Online - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Planned Parenthood: 'Virginity is a social construct' - The Christian Institute - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Is evolutionary biology racist? Why Evolution Is True - Why Evolution Is True - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Beware the anti-democratic liberal centre - Morning Star Online - July 26th, 2023 [July 26th, 2023]
- Unveiling the dark past: eugenics and its role in legitimising racism - Epigram - May 18th, 2023 [May 18th, 2023]
- Guardians of the Galaxy 3 Has the MCU's Scariest Villain - CBR - Comic Book Resources - May 18th, 2023 [May 18th, 2023]
- Fox News in Spanish bombards viewers with right-wing propaganda - MSNBC - May 18th, 2023 [May 18th, 2023]
- The Reproductive Movement Must Reclaim Its Radical Roots and Be ... - Literary Hub - May 18th, 2023 [May 18th, 2023]
- 3 judges who chipped away abortion rights to hear federal abortion pill appeal - ABC News - May 18th, 2023 [May 18th, 2023]
- Eugenics: Definition, Movement & Meaning - HISTORY - HISTORY - January 22nd, 2023 [January 22nd, 2023]
- Iris flower data set - Wikipedia - December 28th, 2022 [December 28th, 2022]
- Canadas policies are a death sentence for disabled people. The country must reckon with its modern eugenics - Toronto Star - December 28th, 2022 [December 28th, 2022]
- Op-Ed: Eugenics is making a comeback. Stop it in its tracks - Los ... - November 23rd, 2022 [November 23rd, 2022]
- Eugenics, Anti-Immigration Laws Of The Past Still Resonate Today ... - November 21st, 2022 [November 21st, 2022]
- Eugenics: Its Origin and Development (1883 - Present) - Genome.gov - October 15th, 2022 [October 15th, 2022]
- 150000 Black Women Were Forced Into the Eugenics Program - History of Yesterday - October 15th, 2022 [October 15th, 2022]
- 20 million black babies have been aborted since Roe v. Wade. Where is the equity in that? - Washington Examiner - October 15th, 2022 [October 15th, 2022]
- What Is a 'Healthy' Cereal, Anyway? - Lifehacker - October 15th, 2022 [October 15th, 2022]
- Eugenics and Scientific Racism - Genome.gov - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- Eugenics Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- The shameful support of eugenics by the Lewiston Evening Journal - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- Understanding "longtermism": Why this suddenly influential philosophy ... - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- NYU Local: Women's Health: Involuntary Sterilization Then and Now - Government Accountability Project - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- A Desire to Cure, Not to Punish: Women Physicians and Eugenics in the American West, 19001930 by Jacqueline D. Antonovich - Smith College Grcourt Gate - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- In unaired portions of Tucker Carlson interview, Ye made antisemitic remarks, spoke of fake children infiltrating his home - The Hill - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- Black women and reproductive freedom meet a crossroad in the fight for abortion rights - Afro American - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- The difference between race and ethnicityand why it matters - Fast Company - October 13th, 2022 [October 13th, 2022]
- Letter to the Editor Removal of Luther West's name is just - North Wind Online - October 11th, 2022 [October 11th, 2022]
- Behind the Shield: The Power and Politics of the NFL - Boing Boing - October 11th, 2022 [October 11th, 2022]
- I Lived In An Asylum Turned Childrens Institution, Said To Be Haunted By Its Horrifying Past. - HuffPost - October 11th, 2022 [October 11th, 2022]
- The Evolution of Godless Practices: Eugenics, Infanticide, and Transhumanism - The Epoch Times - October 8th, 2022 [October 8th, 2022]
- Disability campaigners accuse government of 'back-door eugenics' as families struggle to survive inflation - Morning Star Online - October 8th, 2022 [October 8th, 2022]
- Fox News host predicts that clean energy will lead to eugenics - Media Matters for America - October 8th, 2022 [October 8th, 2022]
- Rockwell Kent at the Fleming: Art into hands of many, rather than the few - Rutland Herald - October 8th, 2022 [October 8th, 2022]
- Review: 'Amsterdam' is a star-filled comedy that loses its way - Star Tribune - October 8th, 2022 [October 8th, 2022]
- Pros & Cons of Eugenics | Healthfully - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- History Highlight: Proponents of eugenics, population control, and ... - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- 31 days of horror movies: 2007s Frontiers is a masterpiece of French Extremity - 1428 Elm - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Explaining Church Teaching on IVF The Torch | Boston College's Catholic Newspaper - The Torch - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- The Vaccine That Could Cure America: Reversing Roe - The Chattanoogan - October 2nd, 2022 [October 2nd, 2022]
- Takeaways from Episode 1 of The U.S. and the Holocaust - - St. Louis Jewish Light - September 20th, 2022 [September 20th, 2022]
- Lloyd Benes: Challenging 8 arguments that support unrestricted abortion - Loveland Reporter-Herald - September 20th, 2022 [September 20th, 2022]
- 11 Disability Rights Activists on Where the Fight for Justice Stands - Teen Vogue - September 20th, 2022 [September 20th, 2022]
- What Ballot Initiatives Will Californians Face in the Nov. 8th Election? - California Globe - September 20th, 2022 [September 20th, 2022]
- The U.S. and the Holocaust. Revisiting America's Role | THIRTEEN - New York Public Media - MetroFocus - September 20th, 2022 [September 20th, 2022]
- A new University of Virginia board member once brought a eugenicist to campus. Students are angry. - Higher Ed Dive - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- World Wars, Eugenics, Mass Extinctions: Would You Believe Were Talking About Splatoon? - Kotaku Australia - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Freaks Controversy Explained: Was Tod Browning's 1932 Horror Movie Exploitative Or Progressive? - /Film - September 11th, 2022 [September 11th, 2022]
- Eugenics Wars | Memory Alpha | Fandom - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- Behind the Scenes: The U.S. and the Holocaust - GBH News - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- The 32 Most Anticipated TV Shows of Fall 2022 - TIME - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- BSO and GBH Host 'An Evening With Ken Burns, Lynn Novick, And Sarah Botstein' at Symphony Hall Next Month - Broadway World - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- Paper: Train future psychologists to dismantle racism, injustice in society - University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- Croydons Pearson feels the pressure in MasterChef kitchen - Inside Croydon - August 30th, 2022 [August 30th, 2022]
- SCOTUS Claims Abortion Proponents Are Motivated by Eugenics and Eliminating the 'Unfit'But History Says Otherwise - Ms. Magazine - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- Birth of the Abortion Industrial Complex: Eugenics Evolves - Capital Research Center - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- Mendels genetic revolution and the legacy of scientific racism - Peoples Dispatch - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- When Sperm And Eggs Are Monetized, Existence Is Transactional - The Federalist - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- Historian shares history of the dark ending of the diverse Malaga Island community - Press Herald - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- Why We Are Not 'In This Together' - LA Progressive - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- How Close Are We to War with China? | Guests: Rep. Chris Stewart & Eric Schmitt | 8/2/22 - The Glenn Beck Program - iHeartRadio - August 6th, 2022 [August 6th, 2022]
- STAM: Alma Adams, eugenics and radical abortion The North State Journal - North State Journal - July 29th, 2022 [July 29th, 2022]
- Moving from Rights to Justice: Uprooting Ableism and Cultivating Disability Justice - Next City - July 29th, 2022 [July 29th, 2022]
- Body politics: the secret history of the US anti-abortion movement - The Guardian - July 29th, 2022 [July 29th, 2022]
- 'The View' will tap Alyssa Farah Griffin as permanent co-host following Meghan McCain exit, sources say - FOX Bangor/ABC 7 News and Stories - July 29th, 2022 [July 29th, 2022]
- There's a straight line from eugenics to 'biblical family values' to white supremacy and the anti-abortion movement - Baptist News Global - July 7th, 2022 [July 7th, 2022]
- Viewpoint: In response to historical misuse of genetics to defend eugenics, some egalitarians call for defunding. Here's why that's not the solution -... - July 7th, 2022 [July 7th, 2022]
- To Be or Not to Be a Mother: A Timeless Question with New Urgency - Justia Verdict - July 7th, 2022 [July 7th, 2022]
- Another point of view - Arkansas Online - July 7th, 2022 [July 7th, 2022]
- A Vasectomy Historian on Why Male Sterilization Won't Solve the Abortion Problem - MEL Magazine - July 7th, 2022 [July 7th, 2022]