Tuesday, July 3, 2018
Why Buck v. Bell was not an Anomaly (Part III)
But another reason Buck v. Bell is not an anomaly is because we as people have not learned our lessons from this decision. In the early 1900s many states had sterilization laws that were imposed on “feeblemindedness”, “idiots”, “imbeciles”, and “morons”. But sterilization was also imposed on criminals, “weaklings”, epileptics, alcoholics, prostitutes, drug addicts, organs, deformed, deaf, blind, and other diseased and moral reasons. Worse yet, sterilization was seen as way to promote ethnic cleansing. This was the science of eugenics which was highly regarded within universities, education, religion (other than Catholics and Jews), feminism (League of Women Voters, Margret Sanger), the Law, the government (Teddy Roosevelt, William Taft, Warren Harding, and Woodrow Wilson), and of course science (Alexander Graham Bell). There were literally thousands of articles and books published on the subject and its importance to keep the American race pure and free from moral sin and inferior beings. Eugenicists believed that most immoral actions, disabilities, bad behavior, vices, and traits of inferior persons were mostly passed on to offspring because they were hereditary. Madison Grant’s book on the subject influenced Hitler and his theories about a pure Arian Race and also about ridding the World of Jews. Madison Grant and Harry Laughlin would be known in American history as our “most influential racists”. In fact, German scientists on trial for War Crimes cited the American system of sterilization and Justice Holmes majority opinion in Buck v. Bell for their defense. Eugenics experts like Harry Laughlin felt that 15 million people or 10% of the American population needed to be sterilized. Laughlin and Grant are on record for defending the “Jewish” cleansing in Europe. Laughlin influenced immigration policy that prevented Jews from immigrating to the United States even though many knew they faced extermination. Laughlin used U.S. Census Bureau records to keep tabs on “undesirable” persons. Here are examples of modern social issues that are still influenced, in part, by eugenics ideas, politics, and influence. Abortion: Like abortion, sterilization was famously supported by feminists and the educational elite. Feminist in the early 1900s were working hard to earn the right to vote and modern feminist are working hard to obtain equal rights in the workplace. The League of Women’s Voters strongly supported the Eugenics movement. The cycle of civil rights movements throughout American history consistently shows groups that become empowered (women and the suffrage movement) tend to use that power to marginalize other groups of people (abortion, the poor, and eugenics). It does not take long for people to forget their struggle. In fact, by the early 1930s two-thirds of all sterilizations were done on women but yet feminists supported this practice (just a decade after the passage of the women’s right to vote). Margret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood believed strongly in eugenics and more importantly its role in population control for “unwanted” and “undesirable” persons. If that is true, then abortion may be working as Sanger had hoped because minorities are many more times likely to have an abortion than Whites. For this reason, abortion fits in the narrative of pro eugenics supporters in the early 1900s to eliminate “inferior” minority populations (racial cleansing). Some may argue that abortion (voluntary) and sterilization (mandatory) are not the same thing. I agree, abortion is much worse. To volunteer to end a potential life without notifying the father is a selfless act especially considering there are literally dozens of forms of contraception. Sterilization is the violation of someone rights, abortion does not violate the rights of the mother, but only the father and child who have no say in the matter. Think about this, over 1 in 100 fertile American women have an abortion each year – averaging well over a million per year since Roe v. Wade. Abortion on this scale is an act of terrorism because it is genocide. Keep in mind, the women having abortions and women defending eugenics are one in the same. Free Speech and Science: Just as eugenics supporters and the field of science worked hard to overrule the voices of reason about sterilization, what is going on today in our universities is not much different. Similar techniques of intimidation are at work to silence conservatives at universities and those with opposing views to climate change. Depriving people of any Fundamental Right (to raise a family or free speech) is all the same. What’s worse, much of the modern free speech practiced by humanity is not much different sounding than the hate and vitriol spewed by eugenics leaders and followers. For instance, Hillary Clinton’s classification of Trump supporters as “deplorable” sounds very eugenic like. Clinton literally classified half the population as being “stupid” and her followers agreed. And no one sincerely apologized for the remark because it was truly how Clinton supporters felt, and they wished ill will on Trump supporters. Of course, there have been similar remarks from both sides of the political spectrum classifying the opposition as fitting in those classifications of people that the science of eugenics wanted to sterilize. And of course, everyone likes to compare adversaries to Hitler. This has become so common most people do not even acknowledge it anymore. That is a shame, because no one should marginalize the negative impact Hitler had on the world during his reign.