By Dave Tombers
A new human right soon could be recognized by the European Union: eugenics.
That’s according to the European Center for Law and Justice, which is calling attention to a number of cases related to abortion currently before the European Court of Human Rights.
The ECLJ is an international, nongovernmental organization dedicated to the promotion and protection of human rights in Europe and worldwide.
On April 2, the ECLJ submitted a written observation in the case of Anita Kruzmane against Latvia in which a mother charged her doctor failed to test her unborn child for Down syndrome.
Kruzmane complains that she was not able to abort her Down syndrome daughter because her doctor had “breached an obligation to prescribe the screening test for Down syndrome.”
“Pretending the existence of a direct causal link between the absence of testing and the birth of her daughter with Down Syndrome, the applicant claims to have suffered a violation of her right to respect for private life, a private life which includes – according to the applicant – the right to decide to have an abortion,” the ECLJ filing explains.
The ECLJ said the claim – which effectively seeks to make eugenics a human right – may sound crazy, but it didn’t “shock the court” or it would have been rejected.
The group cautioned that the case and a number of others pending before the court appear to be strategically advancing rights to abortions and eugenics in Europe, which could have binding effects on all 47 member states.
“The next few months will be decisive for the respect for human life and dignity,” said the ECLJ.
The group warns that the cases before the ECHR are urging the court to sever ties with a “humanist” culture in favor of the illusion of “post-modernity” and, along with that illusion, inhumanity.
Arguing that the court has a duty to protect “all people,” the ECLJ urges the court to protect life by defining much of the legal framework regarding abortion and family issues such as eugenics and conscientious objection for the 47 member states.
“It is clear that the court should set limits to late abortion and selective abortion based on the characteristics of the child, including genetic characteristics like the sex and health status of that child,” the ECLJ writes.
That’s even as some “bioethical” authorities lobby for the legalization of “postnatal abortion,” as reported by the London Telegraph March 1.
“Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are ‘morally irrelevant’ and ending their lives is no different to abortion,” the report quoted a team of ethicists linked to Oxford University arguing.
The ECLJ cringes at such claims and contends, “The state must, for example, prevent stigmatization of people with disabilities and their families, protect the freedom of parents to not abort, make effective the prohibition of eugenics and genetic discrimination, respect the therapeutic purpose of prenatal diagnosis, and respect the right to conscientious objection by medical personnel.
“The court will fail in its mission by leaving the unborn child completely unprotected,” the ECLJ says.
The ECLJ suggests that eugenics is coming out of its hiding place in court cases before the European Court of Human Rights in which plaintiffs are demanding it as a human right.
The organization says such cases could be influential not just in Europe but around the world.
Eugenics long has been a means to an end for progressive thinkers such as Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger. She wrote that her “religion of birth control” would ease the “financial load of caring for with public funds … children destined to become a burden to themselves, to their family, and ultimately to the nation.” Nazi Germany borrowed ideas from the American eugenics movement in its diabolical effort to ease the nation’s “financial load” and “purify” its population.
In a 2008 National Review Online article, Jonah Goldberg pointed to a professor who has followed in Sanger’s footsteps, Princeton’s Peter Singer, widely hailed as the world’s leading ethicist.
Singer, notes Goldberg, “argues that unwanted or disabled babies should be killed in the name of ‘compassion.’ He also argues that the elderly and other drags on society should be put down when their lives are no longer worth living.”
Sanger’s 1939 Negro project implored America’s black community to “embrace birth control,” and there is no denying statistical evidence that a disproportionate number of Planned Parenthood clinics today are found in black neighborhoods.
According to CDC data, in 2008, 471 out of every 1,000 black pregnancies ended in an abortion. For the same reporting period, 152 out of every 1,000 white pregnancies ended in abortion.