Many, regardless if they will admit it, believe that abortion has at least some positive eugenic effect: the dumber proceed with abortions more often than the brighter, and hence, at least we have less future dumb people coming into the world. Unfortunately, this isn’t true; the brighter proceed with more abortions than the dumber, and hence, we have less bright people coming into the world. Inductivist explains:
Percent aborting (N = 87)
A or B in Math 40.5
C or worse in Math 37.8A or B in Science 41.7
C or worse in Science 23.1The chance of getting an abortion was not much different between good and bad math students, but the gap is large in science. The smarties are killing off their smarty kids.
It appears that Margaret Sanger’s eugenic philosophy isn’t operating well; she hoped for the oposite:
Sanger saw birth control as a means to prevent “dysgenic” children from being born into a disadvantaged life, and dismissed “positive eugenics” (which promoted greater fertility for the “fitter” upper classes) as impractical. Though many leaders in the eugenics movement were calling for active euthanasia of the “unfit,” Sanger spoke out against such methods. She believed that women with the power and knowledge of birth control were in the best position to produce “fit” children. She rejected any type of eugenics that would take control out of the hands of those actually giving birth.
Inductivist also further commented on the dysgenic affect of abortion.
Margret Sanger is wrong again. She is a female Paul Ehrlich. Of course she never saw the results of her theories. Luckily, her successors believe in the blank slate.
Very true. If her successors believe in the blank slate, have high IQ’s, and push for more abortion “rights,” then perhaps her successors will slowly kill themselves off.