Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ctoph t1_j89wkvb wrote

The danger does not lie in having a general idea that some traits may be more desirable than others and that a population with more people with certain traits may be better off. The danger comes in thinking that governments would be capable of turning this very general idea into something that doesn't turn into a dystopia nightmare.

159

forestwolf42 t1_j8a4yik wrote

Denmark seems to be doing pretty well in integrating eugenics motivated policies that are not turning the country into a dystopian nightmare (as far as I know that is, I've never been.)

It is a dangerous thing, which means it needs to be handled with care and precautions need to be in place, just like Uranium, nuclear power is fantastic and benefits many, many people. But it does have the capacity to go horrible wrong and cause massive environmental and economic problems when things go wrong. This is a reason to be very careful and be cautious when implementing new technology and ideas, but I still think we should pursue the lowest risk highest benefit possibilities.

EDIT Denmark has problems

14

zane8653 t1_j8a6wli wrote

You didn’t explain their program and when I looked it up all I found was that they forcefully sterilized tens of thousand of mentally handicapped people… is that what you meant?

19

forestwolf42 t1_j8a7fll wrote

Ahh I didn't know about that, that is indeed very troubling, I'll look more into that when I have time.

11

Alec_Strebec t1_j8asg62 wrote

They also up until like 2014 force sterilized transgender people.

https://www.queerty.com/denmark-ends-forced-sterilization-of-transgender-people-20140613

24

forestwolf42 t1_j8atub1 wrote

Yeah that's also terrible.

I mean, I'm glad they stopped at least.

7

AtlantisTempest t1_j8cdl5o wrote

I think it circles back to the point that governments make up their own ideas of right and wrong, and it's dangerous to have it mandatory.

12

ctoph t1_j8a5f2r wrote

Not familiar with Danish politics. What are the policies?

17

StarKiller2626 t1_j8aep5k wrote

They abort practically all children with birth defects and disabilities. It isn't forced by law AFAIK but it's highly encouraged by the govt and medical staff.

48

Amphy64 t1_j8uw18x wrote

Really important to note, as a disabled person who was casually and out of nowhere asked if I'd abort a child like me, that there is no screening test for most conditions. I'm also disabled as a result of severe medical negligence not my original condition. It can cause cleft palettes, which might however be picked up on a scan.

Ableism is also not identical to ideas of eugenics. The focus is on getting rid of conditions deemed disabilities, rather than aiming at positive traits, and neurodivergence (which has links to physical conditions, including connective tissue disorders like mine) is worth considering here.

Wonder how many philosophers have been neurodivergent, and that has been a factor in their philosophy? Some are certainly thought to have been.

Edit: Oh, and connective tissue disorders and hyperflexibility? They carry a risk of injury, not everyone would be capable, but ballet, gymnastics, you'll find those with them among those excelling there.

4

StarKiller2626 t1_j8xpcgk wrote

I agree, I find the reasons of disability or poor living conditions to be terrible for abortion. Especially at such scale. It feels dehumanizing, insulting and like a dangerous precedent to set. Not only are disabled people still morally valuable but they often bring great value with new ways of thinking.

As for more serious disabilities we'll never learn to cure it if we kill off everyone with whichever disability. It feels like a lazy excuse to support certain policies.

I grew up extremely poor and my brother was born with severe asthma and I had ADHD not serious I know but technically it's a disability. How long till people like us would be advocated for abortion because of disabilities? Things we've both grown out of.

2

forestwolf42 t1_j8a75x4 wrote

I'm not really familiar with anything other than what was mentioned in the article, access to abortion, pre-screening of pregnancies to give women the option to abort when the pregnancy is likely to result in a disabled person, access and encouragement to abort when a mother has been actively using drugs that damage the fetus during pregnancy.

As far as I know nothing forced, just a destigmatized culture around abortion and a lot of education about how to prevent disability. Coupled with government programs to aid the disabled that do exist.

I think similar policies in the US and other countries would be great, nothing extreme or forced.

I think encouraging people who are likely to produce disabled offspring to adopt and making it easier for them to do so could be great for society. Again, not forcing anyone, just providing better alternatives to people concerned for their health of their offspring than just hoping the genetic lottery is in your favor.

41

Kingbuji t1_j8boca3 wrote

But we know in the US they would just tell minorities to abort.

15

NuncErgoFacite t1_j8cu9oo wrote

Ever hear of a Mississippi appendectomy?

7

Kingbuji t1_j8cuusp wrote

No but I’m now afraid to look it up cause it’s probably gonna ruin my day.

6

Freec0fx t1_j8ux2m2 wrote

They don’t need to do that blacks are already having way more abortion then whites in the USA so they doing a good job at that already without having to make it obvious

2

AtlantisTempest t1_j8cdhjk wrote

Yeah. It would get convoluted in the US pretty quickly. Already, abortion clinics are strategically overpopulated in the black communities. The pro-life crisis centers that are meant to get women to keep their babies are in white areas.

0

Kingbuji t1_j8cepeu wrote

Not to mention the history of the US and serialization of certain WoC too… it would never work over here just off the history alone.

6

cdubbs75 t1_j8lfxny wrote

Getting rid of "less desirable PoC babies" was the specific goal of noted Eugenicist Margaret Sanger when she started Planned Parenthood so their location in the black neighborhoods is intentional.

Not fun fact, more black babies are aborted each year than are born in the US.

6

Kiltmanenator t1_j8wy1y4 wrote

I don't think it's fair to say there's really an overarching strategy here, certainly not between the people placing abortion clinics & the pro-life crisis centers. Different goals.

Abortion clinics are "strategically" placed where there are large concentrations of people who need their services including sexual health care, contraception, education, and yes also abortion.

Who needs this discounted health care? That means poor people.

Who needs abortions? That means unwanted, out of wedlock pregnancies. Which also means poor people

That means an urban environment.

And urban poor happen to be black.

2