In a New York Times article, the leader of pro-abortion organization Yellowhammer admitted that if all they do is pay for abortions for low-income women then “we are eugenicists.”
It was a shocking admission. Sadly, this comment hasn’t received much attention in the mainstream media, and it should.
Eugenics, the practice of improving the human race by eliminating people with so-called bad stock, is on the rise around the world. Every time a preborn baby is aborted for conditions like Down syndrome, spina bifida or another medical diagnosis, that is eugenics. When a preborn baby is aborted because of their race or gender, that is eugenics as well. It happens probably more than we even know.
Most of the time this is portrayed as a “woman’s choice” or a “reproductive right,” but the right to life of a preborn baby seldom enters into the equation.
Eugenics as a movement first began at the turn of the 20th century when Francis Galton, a cousin of evolutionary theorist Charles Darwin, first posited that science and genetics could improve the human race by determining who should and who should not reproduce. The movement was particularly popular in the United States and Europe where forced sterilization and institutionalization of those considered to have criminal, mental or physical deficiencies became common place. The Supreme Court of the United States even supported the movement with the Buck v. Bell case where Olivier Wendell Holmes famously stated that “three generations of imbeciles are enough.”
Yellowhammer and other pro-abortion groups may not want to admit it, but every time they pay for an abortion it likely has eugenic implications. It’s admitting that certain humans are not worthy of existence based upon the circumstances of their birth.
That’s both eugenics and, in certain cases, could even be considered genocide.
Last month, Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf subsequently stated his support for eugenics when he vetoed legislation that would’ve protected preborn babies with Down syndrome from abortion.
In a statement, Gov. Wolf said, “This legislation is a restriction on women and medical professionals and interferes with women’s health care and the crucial decision-making between patients and their physicians. Physicians and their patients must be able to make choices about medical procedures based on best practices and standards of care. The prohibitions under this bill are not consistent with the fundamental rights vested by the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution.”
With all due respect to Gov. Wolf, I think that he has been grossly misinformed.
When it comes to “best practices and standards of care,” for women who are given a prenatal diagnosis of Down syndrome there is usually one option, abortion. A medical report entitled “Down Syndrome: Coercion and Eugenics,” demonstrates this long-standing struggle. One mother stated that she was told by a doctor that her child’s life expectancy was only three years, when at the time it was about 50 years. Another was told that if she underwent prenatal testing for Down syndrome and didn’t abort if the result was positive, then her child would not be covered by insurance.
How can women and families rely on “best practices and standards of care” when some physicians are using data that is years old or when an insurance company tells a family they won’t cover a child with Down syndrome? That’s why the Pennsylvania law was so desperately needed, and why the governor’s veto was so discouraging.
Like the leader of Yellowhammer said, when an organization pays for an abortion, it becomes an extension of the eugenics movement that ruined so many lives. Life is precious, no matter what. When life is devalued by government policies, then abortion based on race, sex or medical condition becomes standard practice.