Jimmy_Jam
Senior Member
- Sep 29, 2012
- 1,071
- 136
- 48
Just pointing out the parallels.
We aren't talking about highways. We're talking about eugenics. And the progressives who promote negative eugenics today are the same as..no, worse...than the people who supported the eugenic practices of the Nazis.
You're worse because you have seen where it ends. And you still promote it and fight for the exact same policies that the Nazis employed.
Disgusting.
Come on now, KG. I get your OP, but I think you may be getting carried away here. I've always been of the mind that the original eugenics movement was based upon a genuine wish for the benefit of humanity. I agree that eugenics is a flawed ideology, but those that believe in it are not inherently evil, as you seem to think. Eugenics is a response to a set of problems, and I have always understood that, as should you.
As I've pointed out before, there's a reason why "The road to Hell is paved with good intentions" is a cliche. If the result of your actions is the Holocaust, does it really matter whether you MEANT for that to happen? And if the result of your actions is massive evil, does it matter if YOU were inherently evil?
KG isn't necessarily saying that all pro-abortion people are inherently evil people who know where their attitudes will lead and want to go there. She's saying their ACTIONS and ATTITUDES are evil, and they are deluding themselves as to that fact. Their evil isn't in intention, but in willful ignorance.
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing" is another cliche that got that way for a good reason.
IMHO, the value of the lesson of the Nazis is not that pro-lifers are smart and just and pro-choicers are stupid and depraved. Instead, the value in the lesson lies in the contemplation of whether or not the potential dangers of eugenics policies outweigh any potential benefit. I believe that it does, and it is that regard that any comparison of any aspect of eugenics to it's worst possible outcome, is appropriate. Dedicated pro-choicers, the more extreme ones, will inevitably come to the support of some a eugenics policy when debating the subject, whether consciously or not, because the potential justifications will always mirror eugenics ideologies. Because Nazis represent the worst potential of eugenics, it is equally inevitable that their opponents will come to that comparison.
In my never-humble opinion, you need to get over the need to make this a personal attack on individual people, and recognize that it's about the attitudes and philosophies. No one said pro-lifers themselves were smarter or more just as human beings, or that pro-abortionists were more depraved (I'm afraid I DO have to say they're more stupid, but only because they choose to be). It's the attitudes and philosophies that are either more just or more depraved. It's depraved to say that disabled people are less valuable as human beings; it's depraved to say that human life is disposable.
I imagine that, to those that advocate some form of eugenics, whatever the justification, must be exceedingly annoyed when the Nazis come up, but any serious discussion of the subject must invariably include it, and is therefore appropriate. I think you and I may simply disagree on why the inclusion is important.
Oh, I imagine that it IS very annoying to those who advocate eugenics to have the realities of what they advocate thrown up in their faces, but I can't say that I really much give a shit. As far as I'm concerned, if you're going to advocate evil, you forfeit any claim on the respect of others.
Well, I tend to annoy both parties of a debate frequently, so no surprise here.
Anyway, I think you understand that I recognize the comparison and understand it's relevance. I don't trouble myself with standing on one side or the other of the "line in the sand" on this issue. I believe that unborn life deserves some level of protection under the law because it is a human life. My problem with extremists on this issue is that both lack a respect for human life in some way or another. Pro-life hardliners seem determined to protect all unborn life at all costs, often with little to no regard for the circumstances, while pro-choice hardliners seem determined to protect reproductive rights with little to no regard for ANY unborn life. People see the issue as a war, and in war people have to pick sides. I get it. It leaves little room for people like me who would prefer to simply recognize a problem and attempt to find a practical solution. On this particular matter, comparing Nazi ideologies and eugenics, I happen to agree with pro-lifers that the comparison is relevant, and to the chagrin of pro-choicers I'm sure. So be it. But in the process it seems I may be ruffling some pro-life feathers as well.