Welcome! This site exists to help shed light on the topics of science and Catholic faith. Please introduce yourself here!

If you would like to subscribe to this blog, click here. To receive new posts by e-mail, enter your e-mail address below. Your e-mail is always kept private.


Delivered by FeedBurner
Sep
26

LaBruzzo's bone-headed eugenics plan: Coerced sterilization

Labels: , , ,

Eugenics Society LogoIssues related to human life and dignity usually attract attention from only one end of the political spectrum. If it relates to the unborn, the attention usually comes from the right; if it relates to undesirable adults, the attention usually comes from the left.

Republican Louisiana state representative John LaBruzzo has succeeded in the rare accomplishment of uniting the pro-life right and the progressive left — against him. This united front is a response to his proposal to pay poor women $1000 to undergo a tubal ligation. (Make no mistake — though he does not advocate physically forcing sterilization, this plan definitely constitutes a form of coercion.)

Coerced sterilization is a gravely disturbed idea, though not a new one. Commenters from all over the political spectrum have described it as eugenics. New Orleans Archbishop Alfred Hughes called it "blatantly anti-life" while decrying the "bigotry of low expectations" experienced by the poor. The liberal blog Think Progress took a measured approach, letting LaBruzzo's ideas speak for themselves. An editorial in the New Orleans Times-Picayune noted that "[t]he state has no business assigning a sliding scale to the value of human lives, but that's exactly what Rep. LaBruzzo is suggesting. "

In a hostile interview with CNN, LaBruzzo whined that the media are focusing only on this aspect of his plan because of "ratings." It does not seem to occur to him that the focus actually results from the wrong-headedness and evil of these ideas; in fact, he dismisses that idea out of hand, grumping, "If dealing with generational welfare is a bone-headed idea, then I guess I'm bone-headed."

LaBruzzo is not just manifestly bone-headed, but also unoriginal. Eugenics became popular in the United States a century ago, with compulsory sterilizations for undesirables such as the poor and especially the mentally ill. American eugenics also advocated encouraging the well-to-do to "breed," another idea floated by LaBruzzo. The eugenics movement came to a halt when Nazi Germany provided a demonstration of where the slippery slope leads. LaBruzzo should devote his time and attention to studying history instead of brainstorming elitist, inhumane ideas.

Comments (4)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Eric Brown's avatar

Eric Brown · 860 weeks ago

Is this a Eugenics issue per se or is it more of an economic issue? I think there may be some overlap, but it sounds like a sinister approach to an economic problem rather than trying to clean up society from a biological point of view. I've heard this from the econ side, but not so much as a plan for better folks.
1 reply · active 860 weeks ago
Good question. I'm comfortable calling it eugenics (as are many other commentators) because first, historically eugenics has targeted the poor (though not as hard as it has targeted some other groups) and second, LaBruzzo assumes poor people beget poor people and well-off people beget well-off people. He doesn't explicitly say this is due to nature not nurture, but he doesn't give any reason to think it's NOT nature.
Eric Brown's avatar

Eric Brown · 860 weeks ago

Okay - so it might be best described as a hairbrained Economics policy that becomes de facto Eugenics. Hmmm. . . if I were to attack it I would probably do so on the economic side first, but that's me. Still - freaky. I think of "eugenics" as trying to create "good" genes, not simply keep the bad from breeding - but both are true.

Post a new comment

Comments by