Eugenics? What does that have to do with anything?" This is probably the the first thought in most people's minds when the word "eugenics" is used. It is the kind of word that makes people vaguely uncomfortable. The idea that some human beings are genetically, racially or ethnically superior to others has resurfaced. The emergence of new biotechnologies has, once again, made it important for people to take the time to acquaint themselves with this unpleasant subject.
Very simply, eugenics is any attempt to cleanse, strengthen and enhance the human race by preventing those deemed "defective" or "inferior" from contaminating the human race with their "weak" genes. Eugenics was popularized in 1883 by Sir Francis Galton, a half-cousin to Charles Darwin, the father of evolutionary theory. Darwin's theories of natural selection and survival of the fittest formed the base on which Galton's genetic propositions rested. Arriving on the Western stage hand in hand with its cousin Darwinism, Eugenic theory and policy became the darling of many prominent and influential thinkers... H. G. Wells, George Bernard Shaw, John Maynard Keynes, Margaret Sanger, and Woodrow Wilson to name a few. Several American states even passed eugenic legislation requiring the sterilization of certain "types" of people. However, the darling of evolutionary theory and hopes soon became it's illegitimate child. Nazi eugenic policies in the Third Reich cast a new light on attempts to "cleanse" and "enhance" the human gene pool. So, while Evolution revolutionized Western Civilization's thought and policy, its offspring, eugenics, found itself stashed away. The relative no one talks about.
Many years have passed since the euphoria and downfall of evolutionary genetics as a hope for humanity. However, the same core ideas, philosophies and hopes have reemerged in this century. Although methods of application and process have changed and "advanced", many today share the same core assumptions about the origins, nature, and value of human life as the eugenic proponents of Galton's day. Some of these people would term themselves "Transhumanists", while others, fearing the logical outcome of their beliefs about the nature of man, stop short and grow squeamish when pressed about the evolutionary applications of emerging technologies. Regardless of the extent to which various individuals may or may not be willing to apply their ideas to their actions, it is critical that people understand that a transhumanist vision of man's future is the direct consequence of evolutionary assumptions. History demonstrates that there are men willing to take their ideas and translate them into unthinkable actions. Ideas have consequences.
Emerging technologies such as cloning, genetic enhancement and genoism place American policy at a crossroads. Will America pursue the enhancement and guided evolution of mankind? or will it endeavor to lead the world in cutting edge technologies while maintaining its historic Judeo/Christian commitment to the protection of human dignity and life at every stage and in every condition?
In this century, America finds itself facing basic worldview questions. What is the idea behind our actions? The assumption that man is the creation and design of an intelligent being, or that he is the result of chance evolutionary processes? Is man a unique creation or an organic phenomenon in process? Will we assume the existence of an eternal Supreme Being or the eternal existence of uncreated matter? One of these must be right, and by inference one of these must be wrong. So, we must determine our basic assumptions if we wish to coherently act. Evolution, or an Intelligent Designer? America must decide and then be willing to act on the reasonable outcome of of its beliefs. Anything less is an abandonment of rationality.
That said, from the perspective of a consistent evolutionary worldview, eugenics is not an evil. To the contrary, within this worldview, genetic discrimination is a good to be desired. If there is no Supreme Being superimposing His image and ethics on man, then, it logically follows that there is only matter. Man then is highly, intricately, amazingly evolved matter. His state of glory must be the completely natural result of millions on millions of years of genetic mutations, and natural selection. Humankind must have become the astounding, complex being it is today because matter vigorously, and unemotionally refined itself. If this is true, then it logically follow that human "ethics", "emotions" and "natural laws" must be nothing but the complex highly evolved processes by which man strengthens, establishes, and preserves his supremacy over other evolving forms of matter. From this vantage, eugenics is a policy which should be actively pursued by any State with the strength and ability to do so. It is incumbent on them for the good of future generations to cleanse the race of all that is weak or lacking in the "strong's" image of perfection.
However, if there is a Creator, and human life (the fusion of a body and soul) is a gift which only He can give, then as spiritual/physical rational beings, it is our duty to welcome, nurture and love every person which He sees fit to grant life to regardless of race, sex, age, development, dependency, or "beauty".
Throughout history, there has been an ever present danger of viewing people as commodities, products, and property. The philosophy of Eugenics must be combated on every level, and exposed for the lie that it is.
