Skip to content or view screen version

anti eugenics action

people against eugenics | 01.10.2004 09:40

PEOPLE AGAINST EUGENICS FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS
SEPT 30TH. PEOPLE AGAINST EUGENICS DEMONSTRATE AT CONFERENCE WHERE PRO- EUGENIC SPEAKERS ARE ADVOCATING ERADICATING DISABLED PEOPLE, AND GENETIC ‘ENHANCEMENT’.
CONFERENCE STILL ON TODAY (OCT 1ST)
ROYAL SOCIETY RELEASES STATEMENT LEGALLY DISTANCING ITSELF FROM CONFERENCE.

Disability rights and social justice activists protested yesterday at the First International conference "Ethics, Science and Moral Philosophy of
Assisted Human Reproduction",  http://www.humanreproethics.org/welcome.htm held at the Royal Society London. Talks included:
* Why we are morally obliged to genetically enhance our children - Julian Savulescu
* Gay science: choosing our children's sexual orientation - Timothy Murphy
* Preventing the existence of people with disabilities - Jeff McMahon
· Eugenics some lessons from the past -- David Galton

For the past several years, a small but influential network of established scientists, bioethicists, and authors has been working to convince people that reproductive cloning and inheritable genetic modification should not be banned. This conference is part of a deliberate strategy to advance a eugenic agenda.
Press releases which include background information follow
Leaflet text available from  peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com
MEDIA RELEASE
PHOTO OPPORTUNITY

PLACE Royal Society, Carlton House Terrace, London SW1
DATE/ TIME 9 am Sept 30th
Embargo: 8:30 AM Sept 30th 2004

Disabled people and allies condemn pro-eugenics conference

People Against Eugenics (1) will be protesting today at a pro-eugenics
conference at the Royal Society in London (2). Campaigners will be arguing
that the Royal Society should not allow a platform to argue for the
elimination of disabled people and for cloning and designer babies.

The conference is a blatant attempt to advance a eugenic agenda, and has no
semblance of balance. No disabled people have been asked to speak. The
main conference organiser, the pioneer of IVF, Robert Edwards, represents
the link between old-fashioned eugenics and the new free-market version.
Edwards has been a former President and a leading member of the British
Eugenics Society since the 1960s (3). He believes it is a 'sin' to have
disabled children (see quote 1 below). Another conference organiser, Edgar
Dahl, supports sex selection and reproductive cloning.

In addition to these, John Harris and David Galton have supported eugenics
as a positive good (quote 2). Harris and Jeff McMahan believe that people
should be allowed to kill disabled babies, since they are supposedly less
than fully human (quotes 3 and 4). Gregory Stock is a well-known advocate
of 'improving' children via genetic engineering and Julian Savulescu will be
arguing the 'moral' case for doing so at the conference.

Other speakers argue an absolute 'right' of parental choice to design and
select our children, no matter what the social consequences. John Robertson
has argued that this 'right' means that cloning and sex selection should be
allowed (4) and Savulescu believes that parents should be allowed to abort
children with teeth defects (5). Timothy Murphy says that, if it becomes
possible, parents should be allowed to prevent the birth of gay children,
since even a massive reduction in the number of gay people would not be
sufficient harm to restrict 'reproductive liberty' (6).

People Against Eugenics (PAE) rejects the claim that eugenics ended after
the Holocaust. Many of these speakers clearly share the early 20th century
eugenics movement's aim of preventing disabled people being born, but they
have different, more up-to-date means. In fact, many early 20th century
eugenicists, including the eugenics movement's founder, Francis Galton, also
opposed coercive legislation, favouring persuasion and what we would today
call market forces. The advocacy of 'reproductive liberty' is a key part of
advancing the agenda of free-market eugenics. PAE supports women's right to
choose abortion, but does not believe this includes some 'right' to design
our children.

Disabled campaigner, Rachel Hurst, said: "Disabled people are human beings
too - a 'healthy' nation is one in which difference is included and
celebrated - not a nation designed by the powerful."

PAE campaigner Holly Williams said: "The timing of this conference is a
blast from the past in a society celebrating the achievements of the
Paralympics and the new disability equality act. There needs to be a bigger
public debate about what sort of a society we want to live in. PAE is in
favour of an inclusive and supportive society where disabled people have
equal rights, and adequate financial support. Social justice will help us be
a healthy and happy population. Eugenics is morally unacceptable, elitist,
and medically risky."

For more information on today's demonstration contact:  peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com
Quotes from speakers.

Robert Edwards: 'Soon it will be a sin for parents to have a child which
carries the heavy burden of genetic disease. We are entering a world where
we have to consider the quality of our children.' (Speaking at European
Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology, reported in Metro, 5 July
1999).

John Harris: "Eugenics is the attempt to create fine healthy children and
that's everyone's ambition." Harris told the BBC that couples who choose to
have disabled babies are "misguided". news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/3120478.stm

John Harris: "I don't think infanticide is always unjustifiable." Daily
Telegraph Jan 25 2004

Jeff McMahan: "Because of their rudimentary cognitive and emotional
capacities {congenitally severely cognitively impaired human beings] have a
relatively weak time-relative interest in continuing to live." The Ethics of
Killing NY Oxford University Press 2002, p204.
"There are no morally significant differences between severely retarded
human beings (PAE note: this means all human beings, not just newborn
babies) and animals with comparable psychological capacities." Ibid, p228

Notes for editors

1) 'People Against Eugenics' is an alliance of disability rights
campaigners, feminists, social justice activists and members of the public
who have come together to oppose the eugenic agenda of this conference.
2) First International conference "Ethics, Science and Moral Philosophy of
Assisted Human Reproduction",  http://www.humanreproethics.org/welcome.htm.
3) The Eugenics Society, which was founded in, 1907 changed its name to The
Galton Institute in 1989. In 1999 PAE held a protest at its conference in
London, at which three speakers (Arthur Jensen, Richard Lynn and Glayde
Whitney) who are well known for claiming that black people are genetically
inferior to whites were speaking.
4) Children of Choice: Freedom and the New Reproductive Technologies, John
Robertson (Princeton University Press, 1994).
5) 'Its only teeth - are there limits to genetic testing? Aldred, Crawford,
Savariayan and Savulescu, 2003 Clinical Genetics: 63 333-339.
6) Gay Science Timothy F. Murphy Columbia University Press New York 1997.

============

MEDIA RELEASE 2- following Royal Society statement

PLACE Royal Society, Carlton House Terrace, London SW1
DATE/ TIME 9 am Sept 30th 2004

Embargo: 8:30 AM Sept 30th 2004
DISABILITY discrimination concern forces legal inquiry over eugenics conference
On the day that the new disability discrimination legislation comes into force, People Against Eugenics (PAE) can reveal that a conference being held at the Royal Society today and tomorrow has raised such serious concerns about potential sex and disability discrimination that the Royal Society has been forced to take legal advice about whether it can continue. In response to a letter from (PAE), the Royal Society has been forced to release a statement saying that its lawyers were particularly concerned about four talks being given at the conference:
* Why we are morally obliged to genetically enhance our children - Julian Savulescu
* Gay science: choosing our children's sexual orientation - Timothy Murphy
* Preventing the existence of people with disabilities - Jeff McMahon
* Eugenics some lessons from the past -- David Galton
PAE will be demonstrating outside the conference from 8:30am tomorrow morning.
Disabled campaigner, Rachel Hurst, said: "Disabled people are human beings too - a 'healthy' nation is one in which difference is included and celebrated - not a nation designed by the powerful."
PAE campaigner Holly Williams said: "This proves how dangerous and divisive this conference is. Even if the talks are not actually illegal, the Royal Society should never allow its premises to be used to promote eugenics and hatred of disabled people."
More information about the speakers was contained in our earlier press release, which can be obtained from the PAE e-mail address.

Notes to editors
'People Against Eugenics' is an alliance of disability rights campaigners, feminists, social justice activists and members of the public who have come together to oppose the eugenic agenda of this conference. PAE supports women's right to choose (abortion).
First International conference "Ethics, Science and Moral Philosophy of Assisted Human Reproduction",  http://www.humanreproethics.org/welcome.htm

people against eugenics
- e-mail: peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com

Comments

Hide the following 13 comments

alternative view

01.10.2004 11:14

Surely we should be aiming to make each generation more intelligent, stronger, and less disabled than previous generations. Surely that is progress? I would totally agree that killing babies is wrong unless their quality of life is so bad that it becomes justified to switch off life support.

The question you might like to ask is, do you support DYSGENICS?

If you do not support eugenic breeding, i.e each generation IMPROVING genetically then by default you support DYSGENIC breeding where the generations become genetically worse due to the worst members of society tending to have the largest number of children, which is a fairly recent phenomenon. Normal non disabled white babies should not be allowed to be aborted, however abortion is ok if it is done very very early on and in cases where the baby is disabled.

Why is eradicating disabled people, not through extermination! but through preventing births such a bad thing? Why is it bad that no longer will people struggle through life with mobility aids, pain and suffering? And taxpayers money being spent to adapt everything to them. Surely this is progress. If you claim it isn't progress it makes me wonder whether you want humankind to degenerate or to improve, or whether perhaps you are one of these discredited and unscientific "blank slate" people who think its all nurture (and where did nurture come from, NATURE).

scientist


er...excuse me...mr

01.10.2004 11:41

how about addressing the issues surrounding THE CAUSE of so called 'dysfuncyion'

like untested pharmaceuticals, food additives, flouridation of water supplies,
genetic modification...

or is that making too much cash for the cancer industry?

you mention 'improving generations'

Nature already has a way of doing this
it's called evolution...

but wanting to control evolution is the main plan.

it is a plan to modify humankind into a malleable
upgradable state.
a culture of vanity based normality slavery...
constantly being modernised, something akin to the
computer industry and it's agenda of enforced choice...
through enforced upgrades and virus protection...

Captain Wardrobe


evolution

01.10.2004 11:48

Of course we should also be looking to cut down those factors that can cause abnormal births etc.

As for evolution eugentics is simply using evolutionary concepts to improve the genetic quality of the next generation. Evolution naturally was supposed to raise the quality if each generation by killing off the weak so that they cannot breed, however with modern medicine the weak live and breed, and those prone to addiction or lazyness or who are mentally lacking are bailed out and allowed to go on to breed. Modern society undermines evolution so that is why people are now talking about eugenics.

scientist


just to clarify

01.10.2004 12:16

so the cancer/drug industry has not killed thousands? huh...?
I suppose we should thank those nice people at Opren
Phalidamide and the latest Merck arthritis product to be pulled

hey! Merck, they ring a bell...

didn't they used to be part of IG FARBEN
the Nazi industrialists

no must be some co-incidence
nazis and eugenics?...hmmm...


should we also thank the makers of anti-depressants that led to Columbine?
that were eventually pulled 2 years down the line
because they caused phychotic episodes


I am not trying to suggest that evolution 'weeds out the weak'

i believe we have evolved to care for those that need it...

There is NO SUCH THING as human purity

there is only difference

Superman is a freak

good luck to people against eugenics on the action

capt wardrobe


"Mentally lacking"

01.10.2004 12:24

Poor grammar, punctuation and spelling are clear indicators of mental deficiency, if not gross laziness.

"Surely we should be aiming to make each generation more intelligent, stronger, and less disabled than previous generations."

This question lacks a question mark...

"I would totally agree that killing babies is wrong unless their quality of life is so bad that it becomes justified to switch off life support."

...missing comma, split infinitive, ambiguous use of "unless"...

"The question you might like to ask is, do you support DYSGENICS?"

...incorrect use of person...

"Why is eradicating disabled people, not through extermination! but through preventing births such a bad thing?"

...exclamation mark in the middle of a sentence...

"Why is it bad that no longer will people struggle through life with mobility aids, pain and suffering?"

...jumbled syntax...

"And taxpayers money being spent to adapt everything to them."

...fragment masquerading as a sentence...

"As for evolution eugentics is simply using evolutionary concepts to improve the genetic quality of the next generation."

...incorrect spelling of the word "eugenics", missing comma.

"...and those prone to addiction or lazyness or who are mentally lacking are bailed out and allowed to go on to breed."

And since you either lack the basic mental skills to spell the word "laziness", or were simply too lazy to have studied hard at school, your own argument dictates that your mother should have been sterilised, and that you should have been murdered at birth if she refused to comply. Look at the unfortunate consequences of us having bailed her out, and having allowed her to go on to breed.

Richard


we were created perfect

01.10.2004 12:35

We seem hell bent on destroying Gods wonderful work - I thank him that he made me imperfect and this push for racial purity is nothing more or less than a CORE VALUE of fascistic neo-nazi cults

we need to look beyond the physical to cleanse humanity - starting with those like bush and blair that do evil and purport to speak for God

they will be dealt with by the almighty

anyway for you evolutionists

you may believe you came from a monkey
I certainly didn't

Stop dissing Gods fine work in you ;-)

Central Scrutiniser


Spot the Nazi

01.10.2004 12:44

"Normal non disabled white babies should not be allowed to be aborted"

Gosh, Dr. Scientist. How can we be sure that they're non-white before we go in with the handcuffs and knitting needles?

Suppose it's got some non-Aryan features, and we're not quite sure?

Do you reckon we should require DNA testing before the killing starts, so we can make sure we don't accidentally abort a white baby?

Your hero Dr. Mengele also thought of himself as a "scientist".

John


Notes from a Nazi freakoid

01.10.2004 14:50

They call me mad...I who have created life!

scientist


my little theory...

01.10.2004 15:29

Those who percieve themselves as 'strong' misguidedly also see
those who are needy as 'weak'

to be needy is not to be 'weak'

we all need care at some point in our life
it is an integral part of living

surely, a less selfish and more caring society is a good thing to have?

think about a world where because it was labeled bad,
pain was eradicated. But premature death still remained.
eventually humans would forget that premature death is a bad thing...


the goal of perfection through 'engineering' [social and biological] is a
total con-game.

the goal for 'perfection' has resulted in endless goals [modernisation]

an industrial force multiplier

We care because those labelled 'weak' really 'need care'.

and sadly this has become the basis for the disease industry, who have
capitalised on these aspects in order to create a
mechanism of control. The powers that be have played us by
our Human emotional connection to each other.


the goal for perfection, purity, trans-humanism
is the goal of the eradication of 'care' and 'need'
through racial / genetic labelling, profiling and
ultimately eradication of those thngs which some see as 'weak'

it is the creation of yet another mechanism of control

the 'need for strength'
the aspiration of perfection.

a selfish, predatory, vain, NAZI reptillian world


capt wardrobe


Evolution

02.10.2004 08:35

Richard your a wanker, no split infin no funing no question... your a tool...the comments section is here for conversation only ,do you correct people face to face as they talk? This is not an A level test...if you get my meaning...and that is the point, spelling grammer are all unimportant here if you want elite try else where...

just as
legs arms and full cordination are not imperitives...this is the human race, there plenty of room for imperfection...I was diognosed with MS yesterday...normal one day totally fucked the next...these days humans can have long and productive lives...disabilities can be seen as landmarks of evolution but as society takes a Third rIECH APPROACH and will re dirrect nature away from its goal...

you may disguise your spelling or grammer by computer assisted intelegence but if you fail to understand that science just tries to understand Nature while pretending to be its superiour...science is a tool used to exploit nature and in two hundred years has caused more harm than good...once Nature is fully understood it will be to late for mankind to repair the damage done...if you get my meaning...

Simon


simon ... scientist

02.10.2004 09:27

Are you simon the scientist?

Richards point was valid and useful.

Valid in that it points out that 'scientist' has no moral, intellectual or sociological basis for [his] claims to 'superior' rights to life.

Useful in that it points out the glaring fascistic imperitive in those who postulate technological means of controling human populations and their rights.

'simon the scientist' has posted in these pages before - usually in full gory 'idiot' colours - are you he?

jackslucid
mail e-mail: jackslucid@hotmail.com


reply to "simon"

02.10.2004 11:41

Sorry this is a bit of an abuse of the comments section of the IMC newswire ..... but here goes anyway

Just flicking through the comments on the anti-eugenics demo yesterday and noticed your comment on being diagnosed with MS yesterday etc. I was diagnosed with MS a while ago and despite a fucking weird time since I'm far from 'totally fucked' yet (although it can feel like it sometimes).
If you feel like it drop me a line at blahblahblah666_1[at]lycos.com


not totally fucked yet


leaflet text

04.10.2004 09:21

leaflet text follows.
apart from anything else, this is all pisspoor science, biological reductionism, 'medicalisation'.
especially so when eg "genes for" 'predisposition to anti social behaviour' are on the event horizon
PAE is not 'anti science'. eg genomic information can help epidemiological studies,or help us understand why eg MS expresses itself differently and at different rates.
information about human genetics workshops at the ESF can be found at genewatchs website
 peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com

PEOPLE AGAINST EUGENICS
FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE AND HUMAN RIGHTS

“Nothing About Us Without Us” (Disability Rights slogan)

The conference at the Royal Society "Ethics, Science and Moral Philosophy of Assisted Human Reproduction" is a blatant attempt to advance a eugenic agenda in the guise of a ‘debate’. Yet that debate is one-sided when no-one advocating a disability rights perspective is speaking. This conference is part of a strategy to advance a eugenic agenda. For the past several years, a small but influential network of established scientists, bioethicists, and authors has been working to convince people that reproductive cloning and inheritable genetic modification should not be banned. Many of the speakers at this conference have a clearly stated eugenic position, advocating the reproductive technologies PND and PGD for an increasing range of “genetic defects” and many also support reproductive cloning and germline (inheritable genetic) modification.

Eradicating “Inferior” humans
Speakers like Stock, Harris, Savulescu, McMahan and others clearly state that they wish to prevent people seen to be a ‘burden’ on society from being born, those whose lives have –according to them- no value; Downs’ kids, disabled kids, even kids with bad teeth. This is unspeakable. People’s lives have intrinsic worth. You don’t have to be Stephen Hawking or a Paralympic medal winner to “prove” that disabled people can achieve great things, contribute to society and have quality of life; people have the right to be valued as a human being.

Designer Babies
On top of this nauseating eugenic de-selection of those deemed not to fit the quality scale, speakers are advocating the ‘genetic enhancement’ of our children, shopping for extra, ‘better’ characteristics – like more intelligent, better looking, better at sport. ‘Designer babies’, a generally misused term, is in this context appropriate as it highlights the language and the culture of the market at work. This is market- led eugenics. The commodified, genetically engineered child and the removal of the greatest level playing field of all- our common genetic heritage- is the ultimate symbol of the logic of capitalism.

Women’s Rights
PAE supports women’s right to reproductive autonomy and to have an abortion. This is a different issue however to having a “right” to choose sets of characteristics based on changing social norms. When foetuses are screened for conditions which have no cures, there are social, cultural and economic pressures forced on people to make these “choices” in an unequal power setting- the clinic. Many parents tell of pressure put on them by society or the medical establishment if they choose to keep a disabled or Downs child. Women are in the frontline of having to bear the burden of these new reproductive ‘choices’. This is a tricky area with some complex ethical issues at stake, and medical uncertainty in terms of prognosis for even “single gene” disorders further complicates the picture. But the blatant eugenic agenda of this conference indicates where this is all going: “reproductive freedom” is letting in eugenics by the back door.

Social Justice Not Eugenic Elitism

Many of the health and social obstacles faced by the worlds’ population could be easily sorted out with fair distribution of resources. PAE wants social justice not eugenic elitism. Level the playing field. Better diet, education, opportunities, and support for people across the boards, in particular those with impairments and facing other obstacles like poverty. These people want to widen the gap between the haves and the have nots- to improve the “gene rich” and eradicate the “gene poor”. It is sickeningly elitist and despicable. Are they living in the real world? War and poverty are the greatest challenges to us as human beings and cause the most suffering and illness.


For more information contact:  peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com

peopleagainsteugenics
mail e-mail: peopleagainsteugenics@hotmail.com