Designer Babies and the Chilling Echoes of Eugenics

What if we could use science to eliminate disease, deformity, and mental disabilities? What if the tools of modern technology could make us smarter, stronger, and more beautiful?

What if we could put an end, once and for all, to every mother’s fear that their child might be born with something not quite right?

These are the questions Chinese researchers are trying to answer. They’ve recently announced a breakthrough in using genetic engineering to remove certain defects in human embryos responsible for congenital conditions. This should be good news, right? After all, what is science for, if not to help us live longer, healthier, and more productive lives? The problem is, this kind of thinking has taken hold in America once before, and with disastrous consequences.

In the early 20th century, science was all the rage. Educated men thought they could use their superior knowledge to improve the human race. What a noble endeavor! With knowledge of genetics recently having come into prominence thanks to the works of Charles Darwin, college professors and men of science were eager to apply the findings in a practical way. If traits are passed down from generation to generation, they reasoned, then the species can be improved by choosing only to pass down good traits, while screening out bad ones. This process was known as eugenics, and its proponents included many well-respected people, most notably President Woodrow Wilson, the only president ever to hold a doctoral degree.

But how do you stop people with “undesirable” traits from breeding and passing them on to future generations? Easy, by forced sterilization. In the same way you would neuter a dog to keep it from reproducing, state governments across America passed laws permitting the forced sterilization of people deemed to be insane, feebleminded, deformed, or otherwise posing a menace to the health of the species. This frequently included criminals, as criminality was at the time believed to be an inherited characteristic. All told, 60,000 Americans lost their right to reproduce at the hands of a scientific community that insisted it could improve mankind.

Ultimately, the horrors of the Nazi movement in Germany, which took eugenics to extremes undreamt of by most Americans, soured the national appetite for forced sterilization. By the mid-1970s the practice came to an end even in mental institutions, but the Supreme Court decision finding such sterilization constitutional has never been overturned.

Now, what does this have to do with the Chinese research on embryos? Surely such direct manipulation of the egg will result in more healthy reproduction, not less, and requires no interference with individual freedoms, right? Don’t be so sure.

Imagine a world where, for the right price, you can guarantee that your children won’t have any genetic defects, that they will be tall, strong, resistant to disease, symmetrical, and intelligent, all through a simple medical procedure. Now imagine that not everyone can afford this procedure. What do you think will happen after a couple of generations? The “normal” people, unaltered by genetic modification, will not possibly be able to compete with the supermen and women created by science. They will be inferior in every way, and thus ineligible for the best jobs, unable to keep up in the best schools, and forget about sports or any kind of athletic competition. Social mobility will not be an option, and their children will be doomed to the same fate, a permanent underclass at the mercy of their betters.

How long could such a system persist? How long before the genetically inferior humans become mere leeches dependent on state charity, or else utilized as menial slaves for everyone else, or perhaps be outright forbidden from procreating? It sounds like science fiction, but it’s a simple and logical progression from a system that allows some people to be dramatically improved by genetic engineering while others are left behind.

Aside from these practical concerns, there are any number of moral and ethical problems with tinkering with human life. Modern medicine has indeed done wonders for our way of life, but there is a good reason why many governments have banned human cloning and other such genetic experiments. Blind allegiance to science without stopping to consider broader philosophical questions of humanity, liberty, and justice, can only end badly, as history has taught us on more than one occasion. Engineering works great for building bridges; It’s much less advisable for designing societies. (For more from the author of “Designer Babies and the Chilling Echoes of Eugenics” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

The Man in the Women’s Room, and Why He Can Stay There

“He wasn’t even peeing, washing his hands or doing anything else that you’d do in a restroom. He was just standing off to the side looking smug … untouchable … doing absolutely nothing.” This would be weird enough in a men’s room, but he was doing it in a women’s room.

At Disneyland, of all places, whose women’s rooms are filled with young mothers with small children. Then, writes Kristin Quintrail, the man “did a lap around the restroom walking by all the stalls. You know, the stalls that have 1 inch gaps by all the doors hinges so you can most definitely see everyone with their pants around their ankles and vagina clear as day.”

Do you know where this kind of thing leads? It leads to families being pushed out of public spaces. It leads to giving a tiny minority what it wants by taking it away from the majority.

Transgressing Boundaries

The man, apparently a fairly large man, wasn’t a man “transitioning” to try to be a woman. The “very progressive” Quintrail would have been fine with that. He was a predator. His way of being a predator was to transgress a boundary — the women’s room door — so that he could intimidate women and their children.

“Everyone was visibly uncomfortable,” says Quintrail, who is writing for a blog called The Get Real Mom. “We were all trading looks and motioning our eyes over to him … like ‘what is he doing in here?’ Yet every single one of us was silent.”

They stayed silent, she says, because they all worried that he might respond by claiming to identify as a woman. Then (she believes) they would look like jerks. Just five years ago, the women in the room would have told him to leave, but not now. They can’t, because “We don’t know what gender is anymore.”

We must know, she insists. “Gender just can’t be a feeling,” she says at the end of the blog article. “There has to be science to it. DNA, genitals, amount of Sephora make up on your face, pick your poison. … I’m sorry it can’t just be a feeling when there’s but a mere suggestion of a door with a peep hole separating your eyes from my vagina or my children’s genitals.”

Quintrail doesn’t seem to have thought of calling security, and I think we know why. Suppose security came and the man claimed to identify as a woman? Would the officers remove him anyway? Not likely. That way lies a p.r. nightmare. Disney does not like p.r. nightmares. Especially when the company makes such a big deal of having annual “gay days.”

There’s No Science

There has to be a science to it, says Quintrail. We need some objective way to tell men (however defined) from women if transgendered people can use the private space of their choice. She says this as someone “very progressive” who will comfortably share a women’s room with a man who believes he’s really a woman.

But what science can you have when the society and the law treat sex and gender as choices? You can’t have a science when the choices have no agreed outward signs.

The predator in the women’s room might claim to identify as a woman who likes to dress like a man. Who’s to say he’s not? He might say he stood in the women’s room because he felt safe there among other women. Who can deny it? Even a judge who thought the man was gaming the system for his own perverse reasons would have no legal grounds for telling him to stay out of women’s rooms.

This kind of thing makes even a restroom a contested space. It makes the classic “safe space” unsafe. Treating “gender” as choice makes some people powerless to guard that which they must guard, like husbands their wives, or mothers their children. It leaves Quintrail and the other women in that women’s room feeling they can’t eject a pervert who wants to watch them.

What Will a Father Do?

Imagine the father who sends his thirteen-year-old daughter into the women’s room and then sees a man go in. He knows he can’t call security. If he goes in, he can’t make the man leave. If he tries force, he’ll get arrested. The father has to accept that the women’s room his daughter uses may have a predatory male standing off to the side looking smug. Or worse, walking around and peering into the stalls. And there’s nothing he can do about it.

What will that father do? The only thing he can do. He’ll retreat from the public space and never come back to Disneyland, or anywhere else with similar policies. A space that his family should be able to enjoy has been taken away. It’s an amusement park, for heaven’s sake. But it’s no longer safe, not when a man can hang out in the women’s room and stare at the women and children.

If transgender laws continue to spread, more families will find themselves excluded from public places. That’s the inevitable practical result of enforcing an idea of sex and gender as personal choice. (For more from the author of “The Man in the Women’s Room, and Why He Can Stay There” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

AP Sports Writer, ESPN Affiliate Team up to Broadcast ‘Faith on the Field’ Show Featuring Christian Athletes

An Associated Press sports writer and an ESPN affiliate have joined forces to broadcast a radio show focused on faith in sports — including interviews with athletes who say faith has changed their lives.

Rob Maaddi, AP sports writer and author of Football Faith and Baseball Faith, will host the hour-long show. Called Faith on the Field, it will debut in April on ESPN’s Philadelphia radio affiliate, AM 610.

Maaddi told The Christian Post that, although he has many jobs, his “main job in the world is to be a messenger for Christ.”

“I want to increase the Kingdom, spread the Word, encourage Christians to share their faith and inspire nonbelievers to turn to the Lord,” said Maaddi. “So this show will be a forum for athletes to talk about the work God has done in their lives and hopefully we give all of our listeners an entertaining, engaging sports-talk experience that impacts them much greater than scores, stats, opinions and analysis.”

Maaddi got the idea for the show after he attended a Bible study with friend Doug Horton and Pastor Phil Moser from Fellowship Bible Church in Sewell, New Jersey. Horton and Moser will co-host the radio show.

Over the years, Maaddi’s work in sports and contact with athletes have given him the opportunity to minister to people, particularly inmates through Deacons Prison Ministry, a ministry that uses softball “as a tool to enter into prisons to minister the good news of Jesus.” “The work God does through us is amazing. Seeing so many men come to Christ and then start Bible studies and chapel service in their cells is such a rewarding experience,” Maaddi said. “But it only gave me a thirst to do more. I want to keep working to increase the Kingdom, to take my story and the Lord’s message to a bigger audience.”

ESPN’s Philadelphia affiliate, AM 610, will broadcast “Faith on the Field” on Thursday nights from 7 to 8 p.m. ET. The program will debut on April 6. (For more from the author of “AP Sports Writer, ESPN Affiliate Team up to Broadcast ‘Faith on the Field’ Show Featuring Christian Athletes” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

New SD Law Protects Religious Freedom of Private Child-Placement Agencies

South Dakota governor Dennis Daugaard on Friday signed into law a bill that protects the religious freedom of private child-placement agencies that won’t place children with unmarried or same-sex couples in violation of their beliefs.

Daugaard said that he believed the bill would protect private adoption agencies from lawsuits against policies based on their religious beliefs, reported the Argus Leader.

“I’m worried that a child placement agency may make what is in the best interest of the child a correct decision but be subject to a lawsuit by someone who has a little bit of a leg up by virtue of being in a protective class,” said the governor. “And if we can forestall that with this legislation then I’m willing to do that.”

Bill 149 provides that:

No child-placement agency may be required to provide any service that conflicts with, or provide any service under circumstances that conflict with any sincerely-held religious belief or moral conviction of the child-placement agency that shall be contained in a written policy, statement of faith, or other document adhered to by a child-placement agency.

It forbids the state government from acting against a child placement agency that declines to provide a service that conflicts with its religious or moral convictions. The state also can’t enter into a contract with an agency that conflicts with its convictions.

Without Fear of Being Sued

The Human Rights Campaign, a pro-LGBTQ activist group, claims that “These children could now wait longer to be placed in a safe, loving home at the whim of an [sic] state-funded adoption or foster care agency with a vendetta against LGBTQ couples, mixed-faith couples or interracial couples — all while being taxpayer-funded.” It called Bill 149 the “right to discriminate bill.”

However, SB No. 149, Sec. 15 specifically states that another child-placement agency can provide the services those covered by the bill decline to provide and “shall not be a factor in determining whether a placement in connection with the service is in the best interest of the child.”

Daugaard wants to place as many children as possible and hopes the new law will allow religious and faith-based child-placement agencies to operate without fear of being sued. “Whether it’s the state acting directly or through an agency, we need to do everything we can to encourage those agencies to stay in this business and help us find those placements.” (For more from the author of “New SD Law Protects Religious Freedom of Private Child-Placement Agencies” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

UK Grants 1st License to Make Babies Using DNA From 3 People

Britain’s Newcastle University says its scientists have received a license to create babies using DNA from three people to prevent women from passing on potentially fatal genetic diseases to their children — the first time such approval has been granted.

The license was granted Thursday by the country’s fertility regulator, according to the university.

In December, British officials approved the “cautious use” of the techniques, which aim to fix problems linked to mitochondria, the energy-producing structures outside a cell’s nucleus. Faulty mitochondria can result in conditions including muscular dystrophy and major organ failure. (Read more from “UK Grants 1st License to Make Babies Using DNA From 3 People” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

‘No Right to Abortion’: Alabama Legislature Looks to Amend State Constitution

There’s no sign of U.S. abortion law changing soon, but Alabama wants to be ready if it ever does.

A proposal in the Republican-controlled Legislature would declare Alabama a “right to life” state by amending the state constitution. The House of Representatives will vote on the bill Thursday, and if it passes the Legislature and is signed by the Republican governor, the constitutional amendment would go before voters in 2018.

There is optimism among conservatives that Roe v. Wade, the 1973 law establishing a women’s right to an abortion, could be overturned now that President Donald Trump is in power. (Read more from “‘No Right to Abortion’: Alabama Legislature Looks to Amend State Constitution” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Gay Man Speaks Out: Gay Scene in Beauty and the Beast Too Mature for Kids

A conservative gay man has taken issue with Disney’s “gay scene” in the newest Beauty and the Beast film, saying that interjecting mature themes in children’s movies robs them of their innocence.

The movie includes one character, Le Fou, dancing with another male character. The director, Bill Condon, calls the brief scene “a nice, exclusively gay moment in a Disney movie.” Condon is gay.

Joseph R. Murray II, LGBTrump administrator and former Pat Buchanan campaign official, writes in the Orlando Sentinel that pushing the gay lifestyle on kids makes them grow up much too soon. Describing himself as “a proud member of the LGBT community,” he writes: “Why do we have to expose our kids to such mature themes?” Murray asked. “Do they not have plenty of time to grow up? Or maybe the point is to make them grow up too soon and that is where I part ways with my community.”

Disney a Conduit to Social Change

While Walt Disney wanted to entertain children, this generation of Disney leaders has veered sharply off course, Murray said. “No longer did it see itself as a defender of children’s innocence. Instead, it saw itself as a conduit to social change. Walt Disney became Harvey Milk.” Milk, a San Francisco supervisor, was one of the first openly gay politicians in America and known for his advocacy of gay causes.

Others are excited by the scene. Editor-in-Chief of English gay magazine Attitude Matt Cain hopes that the social change message will impact adults and children, calling the implications of the scene in the movie a “watershed moment” for Disney. “By representing same-sex attraction in this short but explicitly gay scene, the studio is sending out a message that this is normal and natural — and this is a message that will be heard in every country of the world, even countries where it’s still socially unacceptable or even illegal to be gay.”

For those who believe gays need approval for their homosexual lifestyle, Murray has an answer for them, too. “As for the argument LGBT kids need reaffirmation, I was gay and grew up without gay Disney and made it just fine. I bet the fact I was able to keep my childhood innocence played a part.” (For more from the author of “Gay Man Speaks Out: Gay Scene in Beauty and the Beast Too Mature for Kids” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Feminists Stage Bloody Fake Abortion on Woman Dressed as Virgin Mary

Feminists in pink masks pretended to commit an abortion on a woman dressed as the Virgin Mary outside a northern Argentina cathedral as part of an International Women’s Day protest last week.

A photo of the protest shows what looks like blood and body parts gushing from between the Virgin Mary’s legs, facilitated by the pink mask-wearing feminists. The woman dressed as the Virgin Mary holds a fist in the air. She appears to be smiling and wearing a rosary around her neck . . .

The photo of the “performance art” was circulated on social media. Clarin and a Spanish EWTN affiliate reported that Tucuman Archbishop Alfredo Zecca condemned it . . .

“It is with great sadness that we read about this highly offensive protest in Argentina,” Maureen Ferguson of The Catholic Association told LifeSiteNews. “It is gravely disrespectful to mock the faith of billions of people in the woman whom National Geographic recently described as ‘The Most Powerful Woman in the World’ in its cover story on the Virgin Mary. It is also highly ironic for a feminist march protesting femicide to advocate for the right to take human lives, including the lives of female babies. Annually about 25 million little girls are aborted worldwide.” (Read more from “Feminists Stage Bloody Fake Abortion on Woman Dressed as Virgin Mary” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Study: 4-In-5 Oklahoma City Students Can’t Read Clocks

They may miss that hour of sleep, but as we turn our clocks ahead, chances are kids won’t be changing their watches.

That’s because the vast majority don’t have a watch.

A new study shows that only 1-in-10 Oklahoma City kids ages 6-12 own a watch. And only 1-in-5 know how to read it.

“Yeah, I was super surprised,” said Caitlin Carnes, who works for the Boys & Girls Club at Santa Fe South Elementary. “When I was growing up that was something that we learned. I don’t know if that makes me old or not.”

Instead Friday, Carnes worked to teach kids in the after-school program how to read analog clocks, something even the kids will admit they struggle with. (Read more from “Study: 4-In-5 Oklahoma City Students Can’t Read Clocks” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Admiral, Seven Others Charged With Corruption in New ‘Fat Leonard’ Indictment

The Justice Department unsealed a fresh indictment Tuesday charging eight Navy officials — including an admiral — with corruption and other crimes in the “Fat Leonard” bribery case, escalating an epic scandal that has dogged the Navy for four years.

Among those charged were Rear Adm. Bruce Loveless, a senior Navy intelligence officer who recently retired from a key job at the Pentagon, as well as four retired Navy captains and a retired Marine colonel. The charges cover a period of eight years, from 2006 through 2014.

The Navy personnel are accused of taking bribes in the form of lavish gifts, prostitutes and luxury hotel stays courtesy of Leonard Glenn “Fat Leonard” Francis, a Singapore-based defense contractor who has pleaded guilty to defrauding the Navy of tens of millions of dollars.

The indictment lists page after page of bribes allegedly provided to the defendants including $25,000 watches, $2,000 boxes of Cohiba cigars, $2,000 bottles of cognac and $600-per-night hotel rooms. (Read more from “Admiral, Seven Others Charged With Corruption in New ‘Fat Leonard’ Indictment” HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.