In a staggeringly horrifying column for The Washington Post, abortion advocate Ruth Marcus argues that women should have the right to abort a baby with Down syndrome, to eliminate, through bald eugenics, “undesirable” humans from the gene pool, for their own good.
Marcus is being heralded as “brave” and “thought-provoking” for her approach, which argues that both families — and those with Down syndrome — would be better off if the condition was simply eradicated through selective termination, because individuals with Down syndrome are generally less intelligent, and often represent a lifelong care commitment.
There’s no point in just quoting you the highlights.
But accepting that essential truth is different from compelling a woman to give birth to a child whose intellectual capacity will be impaired, whose life choices will be limited, whose health may be compromised. Most children with Down syndrome have mild to moderate cognitive impairment, meaning an IQ between 55 and 70 (mild) or between 35 and 55 (moderate). This means limited capacity for independent living and financial security; Down syndrome is life-altering for the entire family.
Nazi Germany began a crusade to eliminate the similarly undesirable: a “palliative” eugenics campaign that targeted the mentally ill, the intellectually underdeveloped, the physically incapable, and the terminally ill. But the definitions quickly expanded on their program, as those who ran — and championed — such an effort determined there were more socially undesirable people than just those suffering from “moderate cognitive impairment.” (Read more from “HORRIBLE: WaPo Columnist Defends Aborting Down Syndrome Babies” HERE)