Genome assessing techniques will be able to provide detailed account of one's genome in private clinics, thus allowing the abortion of any fetus deemed to have undesirable characteristics by the would be parents. It could be anything from an increased risk of a certain disease to the abortion of darker skinned fetuses in countries where a dark skin color is deemed to be a disadvantage. In most extreme cases, even a non-blue eyed fetus could easily be aborted if it was deemed an undesirable characteristic.
To say that Eugenics and abortion aren't related in some way is to deny the reason why a lot of abortion clinics were created in the first place. Margaret Sanger saw them as a way of getting rid of the babies who were going to be produced by "unfit" parents. As a God-fearing man I hold it a fundamental truth that all children are a gift from God and we don't reserve the right to return those gifts we deem to be "unfit" for society. It's not in our power to decide which lives should or should not come into the world.
I am not a big pro-life person. I do believe it is a woman's choice. However I do think that abortion through planned parenthood is directed towards low income Latino and African American communities. Some one could make the case that it is strictly low income...But the majority of abortions are done by people of color (67%). People find it hard to think that Eugenics could still exist. I think Planned Parenthood initially started by Margaret Sanger a huge proponent of Eugenics. She claimed at the time that her form of eugenics was a way of bettering society by controlling "unfit" parents. Who determines who and what an "unfit" parent is? I can tell you that there are a bunch of unfit, child beating, rich, white assholes who have loads of children. I am just saying who are we to say who is unfit. Unfortunately a bunch of people of color are told this. Especially when clinics are set up in urban low income neighborhoods. I teach at a community college. I am a firm believer that people can change their lives. I have seen it happen. I know a lot of people who have had abortions would have been great parents. I have also seen a great deal of parents (me included) who had trouble having children who were capable and wanting to adopt, but not able to afford it. There are problems that need to be solved with abortion in this country. I think it is time to look at how we deal with abortion and pregnancy. Seems that there a great deal of potentially awesome parents who are advised poorly and are convinced by a clinic that they cannot succeed as a parent. I know that part of this view of "eugenics" may actually be an image of racism and socio-economic problems. The aspect that skews my view is that we sterilize, control, mothers of color and kill preterm babies of color. This is eugenics. Not the good kind.
If a woman has the right to her body, then why don't nonviolent drug users? All the time the argument is that a woman has the right to her body. What about cancer patients in states that don't allow medical marijuana? Why can't a coke head who doesn't harm anybody but themselves get arrested if every woman has a right to their body? We have been lied to for years.
In many countries like the UK and India, there is a law that allows abortion for fetus' that have a genetic defect If this is not eugenics then I dont know what is. Also we continuously hear how crime in the US has dropped since Roe V Wade. Getting rid of the unwanted is eugenics. Just as an aside to one comment below just because something is legal does it make it ok Remember Eugenics once was legal
First we could look at Margaret Sanger, founder of what would become Planned parenthood. She was a major proponent of Eugenics and used abortion as a method of achieving that goal. Even today, fetuses that have been tested to have disabilities, especially Down Syndrome are aborted at a higher rate than others, also poorer families to get abortion at a higher rate as well. In China and even among some people in America same sex abortion is performed generally favoring the male. In these ways it relates to Eugenics because it is used to weed out the less desirable of society, the end goal of Eugenics.
The Rockefeller Foundation helped found the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz. The concept of eugenics was further developed by Margaret Sanger (founder of Planned Parenthood) and continues on to this day through the use of abortion. Institutions such as the Rockefeller Foundation still continue to support and promote the multimillion Abortion industry to this day. Most people who are pro-choice are not aware of the workings that are going on behind the scenes in the abortion industry, which is unfortunate. They have been sold the lie that the cause is strictly about women's rights, when the agenda is rooted deep in a manipulation of social engineering controlled by elitist that think the general population is too ignorant and naive to understand the greater good of their purpose to create a utopian society of their making. This type of social engineering also explains why African Americans make up the majority of our prison population. They also make up 12% of the US population and 35% of abortions. I am not saying abortion IS eugenics, but it definitely is correlated to Eugenics and needs to be understood in light of all the information that is available. This requires objective critical reasoning that sets aside all preconceived ideas that are rooted in political ideology. Politicians like to use such issues to divert their constituents from researching the issues and looking at which lobbyist or special interest groups are paying them to pass laws that favor them. Both parties are corrupted and therefore cannot be implicitly trusted regarding their motivation.
Abortion is not necessarily eugenic in itself, but it could be argued the effects of abortion are a form of eugenics. Statistically, the vast majority of those who get abortions come from the lowest classes of society, such as those with little or no income and very little education. Furthermore, abortions come from those who have used drugs while pregnant, incest, rape, and disorders, such as Down's Syndrome. These are all births that would traditionally be considered dysgenic, and detrimental to the gene pool.
Eugenics was a disgraceful theory about improving the human gene pool through planning and the rendering of offensive, highly controlling judgments about other people. Abortion is a difficult choice some women make for the most personal of reasons, based on the most personal of reflections on their individual circumstances. The two phenomena could not be more different. One was top-down, and the other is bottom-up. You can find abortion sad without thinking it's appropriate to presume to make the most intimate conceivable decision for another person. More access to birth control and sex education would prevent abortion more than this sort of inflammatory and dishonest rhetoric ever could.
In general, abortion choices are made by parents. However, if genetics tells us that the fetus will lead a miserable life due to some hideous deformity, we can rightly assume that giving birth to that fetus would be committing a wrongful act against it.
I think that eugenics is just one way to determine is abortion is the right answer for a particular person. I believe that in addition to possible medical issues with the baby, it is also necessary to know how far along the pregnancy is, in what circumstances the baby was conceived, and into what type of situation the baby will be born.
Planned Parenthood was started by Margret Sanger, a leading eugenicist. Her start was to reduce the birth rate of undesirables, primarily darker skinned and poor people. It was simpler to reduce their birth rate than to try to manage breeding of the population as a whole. Eugenics of incentivizing the births that are more desirable is a later development, which started with some families getting prices for many perfect children, and continues on with aborting genetically unfit children after prenatal genetic testing.
There would surely be discrimination in involving Eugenics with abortion. It brings to mind Hitler and his dream of a "Master Race". China now has a shortage of women because of their tendency to abort little girls. There are just so many directions that we could go with Eugenics. The weak or "unsuitable" would be disregarded. If we need more scientists or geniuses, we would find a way to bring them into the world. We don't want homosexuals or redheads? Then, count them out. So, even though I don't believe in abortion, Eugenics makes it more horrible when it comes into play.
In an ideal world, we could see which traits need to be passed along, and which need to be destroyed. and we could conduct this process without bias. However, there is no way that the people who would run a eugenics program could be completely free of favoritism, and is therefore prone to discrimination. In addition, there a certain traits--mainly intelligence--that cannot be measured easily, and can be a launchpad for bigotry.
I am a strong believer that life is precious. I am against abortion unless there is a very good reason (rape, incest or protecting the health of the mother). Aborting a human life because of eugenics (improving the race) is monstrous. That is very close to the Nazi program to actually kill the retarded or homosexuals or others they deemed undesirable.
Abortion should not be correlated to Eugenics because while Eugenics is used to "improve a population" or weed out certain races, abortion is used in the case of unwanted pregnancy. Abortion is a legal choice a woman gets to make whereas Eugenics is an illegal, racist practice that should never be used.
Women have abortions for medical reasons, economic reasons, or other reasons, which are entirely personal. Eugenics is a deliberate, systematic way of influencing and controlling who has babies, and usually espoused by political or social groups with a particular agenda to eliminate a certain other group of people, and it is frequently racist in nature.
Anyone who wants to be able to abort a baby, simply because they don't like that it might be sick or small, or have a certain eye or skin color, should not be having a child in the first place. Eugenics is genetic racism, and it is purely evil and sadistic, and should absolutely never be allowed a place in any civilized nation or culture.
Abortions are being obtained by every class of people for individual reasons, be it health, financial, or emotional. Eugenics serves to eliminate people due to class structure (those in poverty), to benefit the rest of society. I don't think one has anything to do with the other. Most people in society have great empathy for the unborn and don't promote abortion, except when a mother's health is in jeopardy. The number of abortions being performed is lower than previous years, so I don't think anyone is still advocating eugenics as a way to reduce poverty and crime.
Humanity is a gift, and variety is part of that gift. I don't think that abortion is wrong, but I think that choosing abortion as a way to regulate the genetics of your child is wrong. I believe that there is a reason why we turn out the way we do. I opted out of the genetic testing with my child because it didn't matter. I was going to love him/her regardless.
Eugenics was based on racial/genetic purity or racial/genetic modification through birth control at the level of inception. Abortion is a choice given to unwilling mothers. It is neutral when discussed in terms of Eugenics, as it is a tool or a means to application of that idea. Much like a knife is a means for a murder, but is also a tool used for legitimate purposes.
Fundamentally, abortion is a difficult moral question, that an individual parent must struggle to address. However, the decision to terminate a fetus due to potential undesirable characteristics is an overtly improper utilization of medicine. Society already struggles with the morality of the act of abortion, even when the mother's safety is at risk. Our society is simply not prepared for an act of eugenics or genetic selection.
It is of course possible to selectively abort a fetus in order to improve the human race, but because humans have such limited knowledge about what they are really doing in a biological sense, this would be very unwise. Despite what scientists say, human technological and scientific understanding is still in its infancy and an attempt to better the human race using any means would be very unwise.
I understand that some may choose abortion to avoid the birth of a child with a certain disease or disability. However, this in no way should be correlated to Eugenics. Eugenics is the study of improving the human race. To abort a fetus for the reasons stated above is not to try and improve the human race it is to avoid the poor standard of life that child may have had. There are also other reasons people may choose to abort a fetus. Reasons like unwanted pregnancy regardless of how it came about or possible harm to the mothers life if the pregnancy is fulfilled. These are only two more reasons one may choose to have an abortion and I do not see how, in any way, they could possibly be correlated with Eugenics.
Although some might equate the two together because an abortion might occur due to abnormalities or even just having the wrong sex for the baby. The two can't be equated together because abortion is a choice while eugenics just gives you the knowledge so that you can make that choice.
Eugenics seeks to limit or end the reproduction of "undesirables". Abortion ends the pregnancy of a mother whom requests it. The only way abortion could be considered as a Eugenic process, is if the state was using it against the mentally ill, poor, indigenous, or minority populations. Currently abortion is available to everyone of every class, making it equal opportunity.