Federal Judge Compares Abortion Industry to Nazi Eugenics: It’s 'Pure Evil' to Target Certain Babies

That is not at all what I said.

It always depends on context. Raising a child with Down's Syndrome is a lot of work and not everyone is ready for that, so if you are not ready to put down the needed effort and/or are not even fit to do so, it would be immoral yo give birth to it.

Giving birth to a fully healthy child can be immoral too; If you do not even want children, the moral thing to do is to terminate your pregnancy.

[QUOTE9Could it ever be immoral to give birth to a baby who will have ADHD, as indicated by an intrauterine genetic test, in your opinion?[/QUOTE]
No.

I have no idea with what kind of glasses you read my post.

 

This has nothing to do with healthy kids.

 

While the STATE should not make the decision, I cannot honestly say I would blame any of those parents for not wanting to have severely retarded children, to speak frankly, or children with severe developmental disabilities, for any sensitive readers. I mean, there is a reason they check for certain such things very early on, from the amnionic fluid in the womb, and even in blood tests, prior to conception.

To be absolutely opposed to preventing the birth of any child with, "birth defects," would make one something of a hypocrite for being against incest, since all society's proscriptions against that practice developed before any organized religion, long before any that we recognize today, in order to prevent exactly these types of birth defects.

Eugenics, however, has been thoroughly DISCREDITED. To draw that analogy, that judge was being a bozo. Aren't you concerned, XXJefferson#51, that Justice Thomas, Judge Griffin, & the rest of the 6th Circuit Court will embarrass us, in front of the rest of the world, even more than President Biden wearing a face mask during a conference call w/ world leaders, which occasioned that other thread of yours?

 

No.

 

You're being disingenuous and trying to deflect. The truth is that eugenics is being used as one of the primary arguments for the pro-choice/pro-abortion side. The arguments used are basically the same, with the exception of being just wrapped up in the additional element of choice.

I'd even go so far to say that abortion would probably have never made it to its legal status today if it weren't for the eugenics argument.
(Remember the argument about eliminating the "undesirable" aspects of society, and babies who would be born with "defects")

 

Where in RvW is eugenics mentioned?

 

R vs. W results is legalized eugenics

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Where in RvW is eugenics mentioned?

LOL, PROVE IT.....it still isn't mentioned in RvW.

Not wearing a mask is a callous attitude towards "precious life"....

 

It is you who is either being disingenuous, or ignorant. There is no comparison between a nation trying to eliminate the genes from certain entire ethnicities, from their gene POOL, & an individual or couple from not wanting to bring to term a fetus that is known to possess birth defects. I mean, REALLY!

Eugenics was based on a faulty theory of racial superiority of certain ethnic/racial stocks, & inferiority of other entire populations. From all the pure-bred German children, created in the Nazi eugenics program, who were all later tested, there was found to be zero advantage, in intelligence, over any other children. When people speak of eugenic-like abuses, w/ regard to fetuses, they are referring to the parents selecting specific traits, like tallness, or having blue eyes, over the other NORMAL traits (short to average height, & brown eyes, in the example I gave). This is what ethicists see as problemmatic, in the future-- not eliminating birth defects. I do not think you would get much opposition to eliminating the genetic mistakes that lead to developmental disabilities from our gene pool, or propensity to develop cancer, for another example. It is the difference between non-factual, prejudicial biases, versus bona fide medical problems, true genetic errors, which cannot be said of any entire ethnic group, or any normal, functional characteristic of the general population.

 

"This case highlights the fact that abortion is an act rife with the potential for eugenic manipulation. From the beginning, birth control and abortion were promoted as means of effectuating eugenics. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was particularly open about the fact that birth control could be used for eugenic purposes. These arguments about the eugenic potential for birth control apply with even greater force to abortion, which can be used to target specific children with unwanted characteristics," Thomas wrote. "Even after World War II, future Planned Parenthood President Alan Guttmacher and other abortion advocates endorsed abortion for eugenic reasons and promoted it as a means of controlling the population and improving its quality. As explained below, a growing body of evidence suggests that eugenic goals are already being realized through abortion."

"Although the Court declines to wade into these issues today, we cannot avoid them forever. Having created the constitutional right to an abortion, this Court is dutybound to address its scope," Thomas continued.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2019/05/28/clarence-thomas-abortion-comments-n2546967

 

LOL, PROVE IT.....it still isn't mentioned in RvW.



Not wearing a mask is a callous attitude towards "precious life"....

 

Justice Thomas is right.

as to the other. I am fully vaccinated the 2nd dose done six weeks ago. No rational reason whatever for me to wear one.

 

Exactly how is saying a woman has the right to her own body, life and happiness anything like eugenics?

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
LOL, PROVE IT.....it still isn't mentioned in RvW.



Not wearing a mask is a callous attitude towards "precious life"....

LOL, PROVE IT.....it still isn't mentioned in RvW….and THAT is the original claim by the other poster....YOU have proved NOTHING.

You were NOT always vaccinated.....and one can pass covid after being vaccinated..


Not wearing a mask is a callous attitude towards "precious life"....no respect for human life whatsoever....

 

How would she know what color of eyes they have since they change color after birth?

 

Where in RvW is eugenics mentioned?

 

Did you wear a mask before you were vaccinated?

 

When a baby is killed because it’s the wrong anything it’s eugenics.

 

anti-choicers seem to agree with Hitler on that one

 

no baby is born, thus no baby is killed

now republicans will kill a baby after it's born if mom is poor

"Bush Criticized for End-of-Life Laws"

https://web.archive.org/web/20051219170102/http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,151448,00.html

"But on March 15, a Texas law signed by then-Gov. George W. Bush (search) in 1999 allowed the hospital to go ahead and take Sun off the respirator in defiance of Wanda Hudson's wishes."

 

I always wore one indoors where social distancing became impossible and the same outdoors if too many were in one area. I always carried one with me just in case but made a point of not wearing it in most outdoor situations and indoors where distancing was easy to maintain. So if I’m in a crowded checkout line in Walmart or a congested aisle in a store I put it on. As soon as I leave such a congested place I take my face diaper off.

 

How odd.

From another thread, a quote by you:

""""Biden embarrasses the country with a ridiculous show of weakness.""" (by NOT WEARING A MASK)

"""He was the only on the conference call still wearing a mask. The president has no idea how this bizarre addiction to mask-wearing is making the country look like an international laughingstock.


One can almost sense the world leaders must have laughed and eye-rolled about Biden’s scientifically meritless virtue-signaling after the conference call."""


So were you a laughing stock because you wore a mask?

Were you weak?

Did you have a "bizarre addiction"?

WHY did you wear one ???

 

Biden had no reason to wear one on a zoom type call. He’s alone, he’s been fully vaccinated.

 

Uh, he was not alone....there are personal staff, technical staff and Secret Service, maybe his family...he was NOT ALONE...

Maybe he was setting an example, what leaders do...

AND even if one is vaccinated they can still pass along Covid...better safe than destroy a "PRECIOUS LIFE" ????


Have to ignore those inconvenient questions?:
So were you a laughing stock because you wore a mask?

Were you weak?

Did you have a "bizarre addiction"?

WHY did you wear one ???

 

When God kills children in the womb is it eugenics?