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.
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.
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.
Women usually get an abortion to end an unwanted pregnancy, which could save their life (if giving birth would kill them). Eugenics is elimination certain traits- say, red hair- from the gene pool. At the time when a woman gets an abortion, the fetus is too undeveloped to possibly. Know what traits it will have (other than guessing based on the parents). So a woman could not get an abortion because she doesn't want a red haired baby, because they can't tell. Abortions are not for choosing getting rid of a fetus for having certain traits. They are for ending pregnancies that could harm or even kill the woman. So no, abortions are not eugenics.
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.