fbpx Press "Enter" to skip to content

Third Trimester Abortion Revitalizes Eugenics Movement

The third trimester abortion laws in New York and Virginia are sparking the eugenics movement of America.  Its newest twist is a choice by a mother instead of the government to dispose of undesirables.  Our American history tells a long story of our choice to rid our society of handicap. 

History of the Undesirables

At the turn of the Twentieth Century the eugenics movement settled into mainstream American life.  As immigrants struggled in the slums of our big cities, the government was desperate for answers to their woes.  Big Brother responded with a myriad of awful ways to dismiss the undesirables-passing the Immigration Act of 1907. The immigration inspectors were instructed to refuse immigrants that would not make good citizens-mainly the handicapped.  The eugenics movement began attempting to dispose of those that would create a strain on the system.  The law was eventually dismissed and the eugenics movement entered a decline.  Throughout the past 100 years it has ebbed and flowed gaining positive notoriety with Dr. Kervorkian-even serving a prison term for his actions.   Its re-emergence was based assisted suicide helping people die while suffering with disease. It has again settled into mainstream American life through thousands of people wanting to die rather than suffer.  It’s their choice.

According to Pew Research, Americans are nearly evenly split in support of modern eugenics.   Believing that people have a choice to live their life in suffering or end it.  These individuals are normally over 18, a legal standard for enforcing your Constitutional rights. Current eugenics is based on individual choice for life not the old enforced societal standards.  This is the twist that is shocking our nation regarding third trimester abortions.  It’s beyond pro-choice and pro-life, it’s the legal definition of murder.  If a child can be born and live outside of the womb as early as 23 weeks of gestation, is abortion at this time legal? 

Life Altering Isn’t Life Threatening

This is not a dissertation on women’s rights but the rights of the state.  There are hundreds of children saved by the government when parents religious beliefs interfere with medical needs.  In many of such cases the refusal of medical treatment by a parent is considered child abuse. If there is fetal viability at 23 weeks but the unborn child has a handicap, is it still abuse?  If the government intervenes for sick children that are out of the womb they must intervene for child within the womb.  It’s fetal viability that institutes the child’s right to life.  It may be a woman’s choice to have a child but once that child has the ability to live outside of that mother it’s the states choice.  Otherwise, it is considered a eugenics decision by the medical staff and doctor that performs an abortion.  An abortion can help women if it’s a life threatening pregnancy, but a pregnancy can’t be life threatening if it is only life altering once a child can live outside the womb.  Life altering defined as the hardship of having a handicapped child.  Even after the child is born there are other life altering decisions that do not interfere with the legal definition of murder. Choices are still available.

Care Not Destroy

Eugenics defined handicap several ways throughout the centuries.  Today, the definition is comfortability in living the life a said person deems necessary.  Sure, no one wants to see anyone suffer especially the long drawn out death by cancer.  It’s not only demoralizing for the sufferer but the entire family.  It even embarrasses some people as they lose their hair, weight, teeth and physical attractiveness.  But instead of letting these ever-increasing people kill themselves American doctors create new medicines and pain treatment.  Their disease is treatable even if life altering.  We do not kill cancer patients but care for them.  It’s a states choice to provide free cancer medicine, cancer treatment centers and more.  These people long outside of the womb are almost considered honorable for their courage to fight.  But not an unborn child?  The greatest distinction between these two types of “handicapped” Americans is a choice by one person.  The person whose life will be altered but not actually the person whose life will be taken.  When we begin to allow eugenics to end life, we endanger everyone.

Fashionable Demise

The real fear in allowing third trimester abortions is the allusion that handicapped people must be dismissed.  It’s not fashionable to have a handicapped child.  It’s not socially acceptable to be weak or bear the weak.  Fashionable eugenics will affect more than just the unborn.  As we have finally risen to a nation that opens doors for handicap employment and leadership, we cannot take a step backwards and allow the “ugly” babies to be aborted.  It can have a ripple effect further enforcing the re-emergence of judging our brothers and sisters as undesirable for their skin color, intellect and physical appearance.  In a nation that was founded on the equality of all people, our unborn citizens must be the first we protect. 

T

Visits: 685

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *