Blog #29 – Social Darwinism or Eugenics – you give evolution a bad name!
Social Darwinism – the term actually – is hard to pin down as to its origins. Some sources say that its a knock against Darwin when his critics try to apply Darwin’s evolutionary biology to a social context, an application that Darwin never intended. Other sources say that SD should really be called “survival of the fittest” because the man who first proposed these SD ideas, Herbert Spencer, also coined the “survival” phrase.
“Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, jr.
Eugenics was an ambitious, worldwide program that set about to eliminate the lowest tenth of the human population by restricting marriages and involuntarily sterilizing those who were considered to be “feebleminded,” or were petty criminals, epileptics, and alcoholics. The lowest tenth also included, in America, blacks, Jews, Mexicans, and immigrants from Eastern and Southern Europe. In many ways, this technique is akin to treating human beings like live stock and culling the weak to improve the gene pool. So, beginning in the 20th Century, with the help of such philanthropic giants as the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation, prominent eugenicists wrote and recommended sterilization policies that would become laws in 28 states by 1932. 60,000 Americans would eventually have their reproductive rights taken from them, though Eugenics enthusiasts sought to eliminate almost 14 million Americans 1.
Eugenics actually originated with Charles Darwin’s cousin, Francis Galton who drew conclusions from his examinations of prominent British families and inherited traits. An Italian physician named Cesare Lombroso added to this field of knowledge by stating “there exists…a group of criminals, born for evil, against whom all social cures break against a rock – a fact which compels us to eliminate the[se criminals] completely, even by death.” in 1874, an English doctor named Jugdale examined on inmates in a New York jail, especially six who were related. Jugdale sdiscovered that these inmates’ family tree was “full of social deviants” 2.
Coupled with the influx of millions of new immigrants from different places like Eastern and Southern Europe, old stock Americans looked for reasons to restrict this flood of “an army of the unfit”. So, America began passing laws that limited immigration from those parts of Europe – 1921’s Emergency Immigration (or Quota) Act placed a quota of just 3% of any group’s population based on the 1910 Census. In 1924, the Immigration Act went further by changing the quota to 2% and changing the Census date to 1890, adversely affecting the most recent additions to America. The 1924 law also restricted Asian citizenship as well.
But, the worst part about the eugenics movement is that the American movement became the envy of the German National Socialist Party as they rose to power in the late 1920s. “The National Socialist Physicians League head Gerhard Wagner praised America’s eugenic policies and pointed to them as a model for Germany” 2. In fact, during the 1930s, both American and German eugenic scientists and programs exchanged information and praised each other as model programs for other like-minded countries to follow. Euthanasia of the insane was proposed in Alabama in 1936 if compulsory sterilization wasn’t enough to stop the increase in number coming into sanitariums. Even the inventor of the iron lung suggested that the insane be disposed of efficiently “in small euthanasia facilities supplied with proper gases” 2.
Though American eugenics programs did not have the depth or breadth that the Nazi eugenics program had (the Holocaust), compulsory sterilization laws were still in effect until the late 1960s and early 1970s. In fact, 60,000 doesn’t compare with 6 million or even 11 million if you count all of the victims of the Nazi genocidal machine.
But that doesn’t minimize the fact that America is supposed to be a democracy that allows many freedoms and protects peoples’ rights, and during this sad history, the country and its states chose to interfere with peoples’ right to marry whomever they wanted and also to have children. When the laws of the land and the courts of the land uphold those immoral laws based upon bogus science, what recourse do the weak have? Isn’t that what the government’s job is – protect the weak, in cases like these?
Questions: (PICK TWO OF THE THREE QUESTIONS)
1. Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
2. Do you think the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear any responsibility in this mess? Why or why not?
3. Is it possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child? Why or why not?
(300 words total after writing BOTH of your answers). Due Friday, January 13 before class begins.
Sources:
1. Black, Edwin. War against the Weak: Eugenics and America’s Campaign to Create a Master Race. New York: Four Walls Eight Windows, 2003. Print.
2. Quinn, Peter. “Race Cleansing In America.” American Heritage Mar. 2003: 35-43. Web. 2012. <http://faculty.nwacc.edu/abrown/WesternCiv/Articles%5CEugenics.pdf>
NPR’s story on North Carolina’s recommendation to provide assistance for the 2,000 survivors of NC’s eugenic’s program.
1. The states definitely bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. This is because each state had the choice of passing the sterilization laws, it was up to them. Of the 50 states, 28 of them choose to follow through with this right taking law. The other 22 states realized how horrible this law was and choose not to go down that path, they knew better than to take away their citizen’s rights like that. I honestly don’t believe there is anything that can replace the pain and loss those whose rights have been revoked. I mean, sure money or some sort of compensation should be given to them, but then again you cannot buy someone’s forgiveness. All in all, is taking away someone’s right and then paying them large amounts of money as a form of apologizing even worth it in the first place?
2. It is more than possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child. Think about it, some people are obsessed with perfection and do whatever it takes for their children to reach that level of complete precision and flawlessness. Obsessions can drive some people to madness; therefore, the Human Genome Project can lose control of its restrictions, leading to another corrupt way of revoking citizen’s lives. The problem may not be as extreme, only because the people have the choice of whether or not they want a “perfect” child, whereas the sterilization laws didn’t give their citizens a choice and hid the fact that they had the operation behind their backs. I do not think there is anything wrong with fetal manipulation, only if it is to create a healthier child. But using fetal manipulation to create a more perfect it wrong, who are we to judge perfection, besides everyone has their own definition of perfection. A fetus’ most important and crucial stage is when it is in its mother’s womb, so why risk the child’s future health to create “perfection”, it just isn’t worth it.
2.) I believe that philanthropic organizations, such as the Carneige Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation bear most of the responsibility in the mess of eugenics. The funding of the bogus research that went into the study of eugenics was funded by wealthy organizations, like the Carneige institute and Rockefeller Foundation. The theory of social Darwinism was highly preached by these rich enterprises, mostly because they believed that they were the fittest of all and Americans should rid themselves of citizens that were the bottom of the social totem pole in order to better themselves. In this search for never ending success, it seemed that ridding America of the ones that are “a burden to the rest”, was the greatest solution. It is wrong, not only ethically, but logically, to sterilize human beings that are “feeble minded”, criminals, alcholics, or maybe a tad mentally slow. We live in a country that was founded on being a place multiple cultures, and types of people to come together; it is sickening that that they tried to rid the country of the people it was made for.
3.) The Human Genome Project was easily one of the greatest biological triumphs ever however, many problems spur off of successfully mapping the human genome. There is a great saying that says with great power, comes great responsibility, and I feel that this concept can be easily applied to this situation. Now that we have identified the tens of thousands of genes in the human body, and successfully determined the billions of base pairs, we need to use this information wisely. There is always the desire to perfect the human race, and that desire is what fueled the very eugenics movement listed above^. There are definite high points in altering genes, like getting rid of hereditary conditions and mutations like downs syndrome of autism, but if we can change these things in our offspring, why don’t we change how they look? Or how tall they will become. If we mess with nature, is it even our offspring anymore? As I stated before we must take these technological advances in stride and not rush to rid ourselves of societal imperfections. After all, our imperfections are what make us human.
1. I believe that states bear some responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that were passed in the early 20th century. This is because they had control over laws like that in their state, and they should have realized that laws like that are immoral and wrong. Since they actually passed the laws, they should be considered at fault for these laws. I think that they should pay the victims of these laws that are still around because the state owes them something. They can’t give them their fertility back, but they can give them money in order to repay them for their suffering in some way. North Carolina’s plan to pay them back for their suffering should be followed and used for the victims that live in other states.
3. There is a major possibility that the human genome project might spur similar feelings about fetal manipulation to make a healthier and perfect child. This is because some people don’t like leaving things to chance and have the need to perfect everything that is humanly possible. Although most people would only try to make it so a child will not ever get sick, there are quite a few people in this world that would like to get their version of a perfect child. Knowing humanity, it wouldn’t be long before everything switches from curing diseases to trying to make the perfect creation. If this would happen, the children that are formed through fetal manipulation wouldn’t even seem like human beings to their creators. All they would end up being is a poor child caged in a cruel lifestyle where they would have to be the best at everything in order for their parents to be proud of them just because they’re supposed to be better than the rest of society. It could even end up leading to class or race wars in present day society.
1. Yes, the states bear a lot of responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws they passed. This was not a federal law, so individual states choose to pass this law. Nobody forced them to. Their reasoning was that it would improve the gene pool, but that was an inaccurate conclusion. Many people can’t help the situation they are in. You can’t help it if you are born into poverty. You shouldn’t lose your freedom to reproduce just because of that. It is also horrible to think that this is the state’s first choice. They never even tried to help “the lowest tenth”. It is the government’s job to help those in need, and they wanted to “help” by sterilizing people. They also spent so much effort to sterilize people, when they could use all that time and money on something that would actually help those in need. The surviving victims deserve compensation. I really like North Carolina’s idea to give the victims $50,000. The money isn’t the most important thing though. It is an apology. You can say “sorry” all you want, but if you put money on the table, then that means it is serious. It was a major wrong that can’t be fixed, but at least this way, the state is taking responsibility for their actions.
2. Yes, they bear a little responsibility. They didn’t directly participate, but it was their idea. The people that carried out the idea should bear the most responsibility. If they hadn’t recommended it, sterilization probably would have never happened. The Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation had a massive influence. They were very successful and wealthy, so when they recommend something, people will listen. I also don’t think this should ruin Andrew Carnegie, or John D. Rockefeller’s reputation. At the time, they thought this would help society. Today, we all know this isn’t true, but back then, they thought it was okay. Carnegie and Rockefeller did a lot of great things, and this shouldn’t destroy that reputation.
1) Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they passed in the early part of the 20th century? Why or Why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive and who were sterilized in the 1960’s or 1970’s?
No, I do not think that the states now in days should bear responsibility because that was thirty plus years ago. There should be a little bit of bear because that state practiced really bad things by an involuntarily sterilization to people raging from poor people to teens deemed unfit to be a parent. Now with saying that it depends on who was in office and how long that congressman was in office for that state. When you look at 2011-2012 you can see that they should but things change after periods of time. There will always be people who say “Ohh It’s all the states fault, where is my money that you owe me.” You cannot hold that grudge. People who are in office where never a part on what happened back in the thirties till the seventies. You just can’t do what people do all the time now in days.
2) Is it possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child? Why or not?
I am a little torn on this question. I am defiantly fifty fifty because people are always looking for that next best thing to happen and they would want their child to be a normal as possible. Some people and I agree with them about this would be that raising a child with special would be a lot of work and also be very expensive and even they may not be able to afford the equipment need for the child. I am not saying that if you have a child with a disability that you should give him away or give up the child’s life for science I am just saying that it would be hard. On the other hand you want to have a baby that is perfectly natural. I know that my parents would take me for whoever I am and however I turned out. You don’t want to undergo all kinds of testing for your child. You do want best for your child but you want your child to be “real.” Yes it would be challenging but in the long run you would be very happy with your child no matter what happens to them.
1. Yes, I defiantly one-hundred-percent think the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. Those 28 states agreed to the cruel Eugenics plan to eliminate what they considered to be the lowest tenth of the human population in their states. When agreeing to the Eugenics plan, the state agreed to restrict marriage rights and involuntarily sterilize their innocent citizens, which put them in the shady seat of blame. I think the surviving victims of sterilization in the 1960s and 1970s should be given the amount of money to adopt a child is they want to and are eligible, but if that is not the case then they should be handed money, like the $50,000 being given to the survivors recently. Although we can never truly make up for what was done to these victims, an attempt must be made to at least acknowledge responsibility and make an effort to make things right in some way, shape, or form.
2. Yes I do think that the philanthropic organizations like the Carnegie Institute or the Rockefeller Foundation also share some of the responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century and the issues that were caused. I would say that they are to blame because they helped the Eugenics program with their plan to restrict marriage rights and involuntarily sterilize innocent citizens in order to eliminate the lowest tenth of the human population. They used their influence to persuade people that it was a good idea and to get the laws passed. These groups, the philanthropic giants, were highly respected and admired by much of the population and so for them to abuse that power of influence and persuasion was cruel and unconscionable.
1. I believe that the states do bear responsibility for the compulsory laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th century. I believe they do because the state made the decision to sterilize its people and the government didn’t decide it for them. It’s like saying you should be responsible for doing anything good or bad and someone else should not make you decide on that bad or good thing. The surviving victims should be compensated in some way so they can feel happier about their lives. One example of compensation is that they should get paid a certain amount of money to help them out. Another way the victims could get compensated is that they should get free health benefits or some other type of benefit from the government. In reality, the compensation would never help these victims because they never got the chance to have children and they were living with this or are still living with this today.
2. I do think that that the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear responsibility in this mess because the organizations decided to help pay for a horrible program. They knew exactly what they were doing when they decided to help the sterilization mess, at the time. The organizations thought that the program would help America but actually it didn’t because some people are still suffering from it today. People probably thought that since these philanthropic organizations participated in this mess that they should, even though it was wrong. I believe that if the philanthropic organizations did not promote this mess then people would probably not of thought to keep going through with it. Then people now wouldn’t think about getting the perfect child or race and then destroying another race because they are “unfit and/or feebleminded” to live onward.
1. Yes, states DO bear responsibility for the sterilization laws passed in the early 20th century. This is partly their fault because the states let the laws pass. If the states thought that sterilization was a bad idea, they clearly could have stopped these laws from passing. If they didn’t like what was going on with this idea, they probably had the power to stop the laws. For the surviving victims, I actually don’t think there is anything that can be done. There is nothing that can make up for the fact that they could never have children of their own. However, there could be money rewarded to the people that are still alive today. This doesn’t make up for the inability to reproduce, but I don’t think it is fair for these people to walk away empty-handed. Money is a universal gift, and could probably benefit the majority of the people who are still a live today that suffered through this.
3. I believe that the Human Genome Project could spur feelings about fetal manipulation, but not similar to the ones shown in the laws made in the early 20th century. The Human Genome Project could cause people to believe that people aren’t capable of valuing their own children that aren’t “designed.” To create a healthier and more perfect child kind of goes along with the sterilization, but in this context I think it is different because you are making your kid like it is a dress. While in sterilization, you are simply not physically capable of having a child. They both go along the lines of creating a “perfect” child, but in different ways.
Question #1
Yes the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. The states bear responsibility because the states were the ones that allowed it to happen also America is a place of Democracy that allows many freedoms and is a place that people have rights that should be protected. So for a state to allow scientist to say that that person is not fit or good enough to reproduce and to also not allow the citizen to have a choice. So yes I think that states bear some responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. I think that the people or states responsible should repay as in compensation but also try to find out how to reverse the effects. If there is no possible way to reverse it then allow the person effected to receive compensation and whatever else that takes away the emotional scars no matter how silly, Because I see as people can do something as silly as take away your ability to reproduce then the victim gets a chance to do something silly back with some restrictions of course.
Question #2
Yes I believe that philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear any responsibility in this mess. I think this because first of all it’s not like they just gave money away to a random person or like they were forced to fund they knew exactly what they were doing. Also some of the people that weren’t allowed to reproduce were poor people. That’s why I believe especially Carnegie bear responsibility because his family was not rich they were impoverished he had to start helping pay the bills at 12 but nobody tried to say he was not good enough to reproduce.
I think the major organizations of this time such as Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation bear a lot of responsibility for the situation that occurred. They could have used the money to try and donate money to get this law vetoed and just another balled up piece of paper in the trash but they didn’t and then whined about it until it was stopped. Also, if they thought to help ahead of time, they could have donated just a small amount of their profit to help research the issue at hand. I mean they could have helped the idiot scientists and they would have realized that stupidity isn’t a trait that is passed down from generation to generation, but more of a trait acquired through years of bad habits. So all in all, if the states had been smart with their usage of money and/or time then this law could have been something much less then what it turned out to be.
I think it is very possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a perfect baby. I think people, especially in this time, really want a natural baby and if given the opportunity to have a perfect baby, wouldn’t take it because of all the guilt it would give people. I think it is different between now and then because all the people who were smart wanted to make sure that there children were smart to due to the high standards. Now, its all about having a baby who is in your blood and if not, adopting or rescuing one which people use as an excuse to feel good about themselves. Though I believe there are people who would want a perfect baby, I think for the most part in todays time, they would not want to have a baby who isn’t related to them unless they want to feel good about themselves like most major stars in todays time. But back to the major point, I really do feel people feel similar about the HGP and the Eugenics project.
1. I think the states bear some of the responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws passed in the early 20th century. This blame, however, is mostly attributed to the fact that the states simply accepted the laws introduced and supported by eugenicists and organizations of the time. The eugenicists introduced the procedure, while the philanthropists sponsored it. It’s unlikely the program would have existed in the United States without this instigation. In my opinion, the blind acceptance the states took toward these laws was wrong, and thus the states do deserve a portion of the blame. But if eugenics and social Darwinism were popular ideas of the time, the conformist nature of the time period mat have contributed to the general acceptance. Like stated earlier, the states merely provided an outlet for this to take place, and had they not, eugenics still would have come into play elsewhere around the world. Still, I believe that the states and foundations both should compensate the victims of the program. This proves difficult, considering the moral tribulations of pricing human life. Still, the most logical way to help those surviving would be in money or some other item which proves itself desired by those who had been sterilized.
2. I think the philanthropic organizations, such as the Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation, bear the majority of the responsibility for the eugenics mess. Had these two foundations not contributed to the eugenics program, it might not have even taken seed in the United States in the first place. The social Darwinists used these organizations to put their ideas into play, in turn funding the eugenics program thus causing the whole ordeal. The states and eugenicists themselves also shoulder some blame. Although they spearheaded the idea, none of the sterilization could have taken place without a primary factor: money. And this came from the philanthropists.
1. I think that State Governments deserve a lot of the blame for passing the laws on compulsory sterilization. If a state passes a law they take full responsibility for the law’s successes or failures because we elected them to office and pay them with our tax money to do what is best for the state. Therefore they assume full responsibility for the terrible things that happened to people as far as their reproductive rights went. I feel like some sort of compensation should be made for the people who are still living who were sterilized because of these laws. The people who had their reproductive rights taken away should receive a monetary compensation for any hardships they had faced in the past, and they should also receive free health care from the Government for their troubles. The Government should compensate them because it is the only thing we can do now, the Government can’t go back in time to change history and make it so the people affected by the compulsory sterilization laws were never affected.
3. I believe that the human genome project could stir up the idea of fetal manipulation. With the increasing knowledge of genetics and how certain genes can cause disease or cause a healthier person, we will want to eliminate the bad genes and turn them into good genes. When someone has a child they don’t hope for their child to have any type of disease, they want a healthy child and they would want to know if their child would have the genes to give them a disease, and if they did the parents would want to change that. With the human genome project we learn more of what genes do what and in the future could possible enable people to alter the genes of a child that isn’t born yet. On a further note if we were able to change genetics, there is a great possibility that an elitist society could be created where the rich have genetically superior children because they are able to alter their genes while the poorer people can’t afford this and they wouldn’t have the altered genetics. That is why I think the human genome project is opening doors for fetal manipulation.
2) I think the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear responsibility in this mess because they helped eugenics become what it was. I think it’s completely their fault because if they hadn’t helped then the Eugenicists wouldn’t have had the money to fund their business. They helped move the process along. If these big companies or corporations would have been against it, then I doubt the Eugenicists would have been able to get their money from somewhere else and therefore this awful project wouldn’t have been able to continue. I also find it horrifying that these scientists helped the Nazi scientists exterminate the Jews. These big companies obviously knew what they were doing and in turn they managed to help sterilize 60,000 people. It may seem as if they only had a small part in it, but it doesn’t matter how big or small the part was that they played. It was the idea that they played any part at all. It’s similar to what people say with bullies. How the bystander is worse than the bully. The companies were the bystanders while the Eugenicists were the bullies, therefore making the companies worse than the eugenicists.
3) Yes I think that the Human Genome Project could spur similar feelings because in all honesty if you could make your child perfect, why wouldn’t you? This is similar to the idea of the eugenics because they believed that everyone above the 10% was worth breeding because they’re offspring would be closer to their idea of “perfection”. People would most likely want to have a child with no defects versus a child with a birth defect. People these days don’t understand that even if your child is born with a birth defect there still your child and no matter what, there’s still something special about them. Also, people may feel that fetal manipulation is necessary so that the parents won’t have to have as a hard of a time raising children. Raising the child with the birth defect is definitely harder than raising the child without one. Another reason is that the government may feel that manipulating the child to be perfect could help the government in the long run by having more successful people. Many people may think that fetal manipulation is a good idea, but I personally do not because I think that this country is already highly dependent on looks and a persons outside versus their inside. I think that our country needs to learn that it’s what’s on the inside that counts and to love everybody for who they are.
1. States definitely bear some of the responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. If they are the ones who passed the law that means that they actively supported it and were not just bystanders. If the states were to claim that they didn’t know what they were getting into, they were pressured into supporting the laws, or any other claim of innocence, it would only make them more guilty for being ill-informed or not standing up for what is right. As for the victims of this tragedy, they can never have their own children and there really is nothing that can completely compensate that, but it is important that we, as Americans, try. This could be through giving these people compensation as a way to ease the pain or even take them out of the situation that deemed them fit for compulsory sterilization. Alternatively, money could be put into raising awareness to ensure that no such tragedy occurs again.
2. The “philanthropic” organizations like Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation without a doubt bear responsibility for this mess. They were the ones who willing supported and put into motion these eugenics programs. Had it not been for them, these projects might not have occurred, or at least not on this scale. They were clearly in favor of this large scale “bullying”, and as far as bullying goes bystanders are not innocent either. These organizations were not even bystanders though; they were full-fledged participants. Although they were not actually euthanizing or sterilizing anybody, they served as the fuel for the whole operation without which would not have gotten far.
1. I think that the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie institute and Rockefeller foundation deserve the responsibility for the mess. I think this cause it clearly said that these two companies helped put and supported these vicious eugenics programs. Both of these two people were very wealthy but they also liked to give back to the community. They put some of that money that they had into these programs though, and these programs wanted to eliminate the lowest 10 %. Though these were not the only people to blame, the scientists that were behind the whole thing. They were really the ones that wanted to eliminate people, ant that is just plain wrong.
2. I don’t think that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child because you can’t control how a baby is born like. It is completely random what they are like and how they look. Sure you could try to change yourself in order to hope that you change a child, but they only get half of the genes from you. I feel that the human genome project is trying to “control” the human race, and in my opinion that is not the right thing to do. I mean be able to alter a child and how he is in the world is a pretty cool idea, but that doesn’t make it right. If you do that to a child that they will never actually be who they were meant to be. You could be taking some great away from them. I could see how it would be nice to have a perfect world but to me it just would not fell like it is a real world.
1. I believe that the states are held somewhat responsible for passing the law that allowed sterilization laws in the early part of the 20th century. The states have the right to nullify the law if they really didn’t want to use it. I believe the government could have very possibly bought in to the opinion that some people were born as inferiors to society. Not all states took part in it, so it’s clear the law wasn’t mandatory across the nation. However, there could have easily been corruption involved, especially in the states with a large quantity of minorities living there. Some states were probably also afraid to rebel against what the country felt like was mandatory, especially in the south where there were many laws against minorities already. To the surviving victims, many things could be given to them. They could get a money grant from the government, school of their adopted children could be paid for, and so on (similar to things granted from affirmative action to the Native Americans).
2. I think that the Human Genome Project could spur some similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in creating the perfect baby. It would obviously be moral, unlike Eugenics, but in creating the perfect baby he would need to be healthy. If he is born with diabetes, for example, then the health problem causes it to be imperfect. If the Human Genome Project had people with bad health problems that could be passed on from generation to generation, then it’s going to be difficult for them to create a healthy baby. You would have to have healthy genes and the parents would have to “fit the part” in creating the perfect offspring. The Human Genome Project also has the availability of resources to fulfill the necessities for the perfect offspring, so I don’t see why they wouldn’t manipulate with genes in a similar fashion used in Eugenics.
Blog 29:
2. Yes, I think Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation are responsible for the mess. They are not totally responsible, but still play a very distinctive part. They are the ones who supported the system, and funded it. They even helped write the procedures themselves. They promoted the program, making it look better than it was. It was not right to label people as ‘incapable of producing offspring’ if they weren’t rich or had a perfect record.
3. It is possible for the Human Genome Project to spur feelings about ‘perfect children’. If that type of genetic alteration program was given to humans it would be disastrous. We still don’t know a lot about the genes of humans and the genetic code. What the Human Genome Project did was ground-breaking; nevertheless, that doesn’t make it right. The procedure was both wrong and unnatural. It would be a good thing to find how to prevent major diseases and complications such as heart disease and cancer, but to manipulate appearance isn’t.
1. I think that the states that passed laws for sterilization hold that responsibility. They knew what those sterilization laws implied and they were the ones who agreed to that awful act. By passing these laws, they were stripping American citizens of their natural rights to reproduce. America is supposed to be a democracy, and by creating those laws they took away the freedom that people came to America for. These laws also limited the amount of immigrants coming into the country. These laws also influenced some of the awful things that went on in Germany. The idea of creating the perfect population seems to have influenced the Holocaust.
For the people who were sterilized, I think that there should be something done for them to benefit them. They were forced into sterilization and there is no way of giving that right back to them. As for giving the victims something in return for their suffering, I don’t think that giving them money is the answer (like North Carolina is doing). Like the woman said in the NPR story, giving them $50,000 just isn’t enough for the pain caused by the unknown sterilization.
2. I think that the Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation also hold responsibility for the eugenics. They supported the act and recommended it! Their recommendations caused 28 states to pass eugenic laws by the 1930’s. Andrew Carnegie prided himself on giving most of his fortune to charity. Unfortunately, a portion of his donated money went to funding the eugenics research. The Rockefeller family was also highly invested in the eugenics program, giving millions of dollars to the creation of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratories, where the eugenic research and development took place. I think that both men being involved in this program is, in a way, contradictory to their values. Both men believed in giving their money to good causes and charities, but giving to a cause like this, in my opinion, were wrong. The whole eugenics program took people’s opportunities to create a family bases on habits or genes. The whole concept just seems wrong and corrupt.
1. I think the states hold a lot of responsibility in the sterilization laws that were passed in the early 20th century .Not all the blame should be put on these companies, but a good amount of it should. If the states had not of approved for the laws, then they never would of came to be. Also the passing of the Immigrant Act put limits on the people coming to the country. I don’t understand why These companies would want to stop immigrants from coming over because they could use them for cheap labor, and if there were to many to could use the newer immigrants as replacements, for workers who were sick, fired, or killed in an accident. Also when these companies gave their money to these causes, they mislead their business partners, and associates, and people think this was a good cause.
2. Yes I feel that philanthropic companies have some responsibility problems that eugenics methods have caused people all over the world during that time. Maybe if these companies such as Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation hadn’t of donated money, the German National Socialist Party wouldn’t have been influenced by how America handled Eugenics. The methods of Eugenics wouldn’t have gone as far as they did, and maybe they wouldn’t have been a Holocaust, and World War 2. Not all the blame should go to these companies, because they didn’t give orders, or anything, they just made donations to the people trying to rid the country of lower class. A lot of the blame should go to the people who voted on the bill that allowed the sterilization laws to pass. Also the fact that these companies were willing to pay for programs that planned to kill 14 million people, shows that they played a big hand in this Madness.
1.) Yes I do believe the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed I the early part of the 20th Century. The states had the option of not passing the law, because not all of the states took part of the law. There were 28 states that chose to enforce the compulsory sterilization laws. The surviving victims alive after the sterilization should definitely receive some benefit that will help them make their lives easier, since their lives were so bad up to this point. Sterilization was forced upon the people. America was supposed to be a democracy, people came to America to have freedom, but we took that away from them by forcing sterilizations on them. What these people could get for benefits could be money, housing, education, etc. Doing this would be a small way of giving back to the victims of this horrible tragedy.
2.) I do believe that the philanthropic organizations such as Carnegie’s Institute and the Rockefeller bear a lot of responsibility for this mess. Both Carnegie and Rockefeller helped out the eugenics a lot. What they did to help them out was that they funded their own organizations, and those organizations had science departments. The scientists in these departments were studying methods to get rid of the inferior humans that were on our planet. Carnegie and Rockefeller single handily helped the eugenics do what they wanted to do, such as the sterilizations. Carnegies and Rockefellers philanthropic organizations were one of the major causes of the issue of eugenics. These organizations helped get rid of bad genes such as alcoholics, criminals, and mentally ill people, and some immigrants.
1. Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
I believe that the states are held somewhat responsible for passing the law that allowed sterilization laws in the early part of the 20th century.The states knew what the laws did to the americasn people was to take away people’s rights. This is not ok people should have the choice to preform the act of eugenics not just operate on any immigrant or person that walks into the doctor’s office. This law is morally wrong because if this bogus science idea was never thought of than Germany would never have the holacaust and nothing so terrible would be marked in this trajic history.
Do you think the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear any responsibility in this mess? Why or why not?
I think that the Caargenie and Rockfelle institute hold some responablity but at the same time they recommended that idea of Eugenics. They didn’t go around telling people believe in this idea of ours. But then again they were big fighure heads of companies and had alot of power so at the same time state govenents thiught it was a good idea because bug business men think its a good idea.
I think that Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation have a lot responsibility in the mess because they helped the eugenicists write and recommended sterilization policies that would become laws in 28 states in 1932 and 60,000 Americans would then have their reproductive rights taken away from them, though Eugenics enthusiasts were going to eliminate almost 14 million Americans. This led to creating a law that took limited immigration from Eastern and Southern parts of Europe in 1921, and in 1924,Also these organizations helped get the money so that they could get their ideas working right away. They also kept pushing for this to go on. Everything had a downfall and the main reason why any of this got started was because of Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation.
Yes it is possible for The Human Genome project to spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in the world in order to create a healthier, and more perfect child, because since they are trying to make you to be able to control the genes of humans so you can fix them so the child will be in better health and just the way you want your child to turn out. It will be easier on most parents if they know that their child is perfect and can grow up to be just how they want their child to be, and to be successful in their lives and they can make a difference in the country as well. I’m not saying I would necessarily want to take place in a project like this but for parents who know exactly what they want and don’t want their baby to be born, with any diseases or disabilities it is a good idea for them to look into it because they will know exactly how their child is going to end up.
2. I think the Rockefeller Foundation and Carnegie institute are not fully to blame. Many big organizations support things without fully knowing what they are getting themselves into. At the time people thought that this was a genius idea so these companies thought they were investing in the future of the country. The Rockefeller and Carnegie foundations did not create the laws or perform the operations but they did lend money for helping the cause. The state is one who specifically issued for these operations to be performed where as Rockefeller and Carnegie just supported the cause via money. If a state decided to give money to living victims then maybe these institutes should contribute to it. Like help with the compensation to the survivors.
3. The Human Genomes original purpose was to solve the mystery of the genetic makeup of the human body. Now that it has been completed study’s have lead to people having the idea of creating their perfect child also known as a “test tube baby”. The problem with creating a perfect child is that we will eventually be making an indestructible generation. Some of the greatest thinkers of our time have certain strange traits but that has helped them to be able to think differently. For example Mark Zuckerberg has extreme social issues yet that led him to create one of the greatest social networks of our generation. Also the artist Van Gough was extremely mentally ill and he is considered a painting prodigy to this day. If we were to eliminate every flaw there would be no individuals anymore. We would all be the same. Also I believe that it is part of life for your child to come out as it does. It is just the flow of life, I don’t think there is any need for scientific interruption.
1.) Yes the states have responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws passed in the early 20th century. It is not just the government’s fault for these laws being passed, its the state’s too. 28 states had to agree and pass these laws for them to be put into action so it is equally their fault. For the surviving victims, I think the state should send the a deep, and thoughtful apology for what was done to them. In addition to an apology, I think these victims should be sent cash grants (which is what North Carolina is doing now). The cash should be given to the victims and their families because I can only imagine the devastation the families went through finding out that this had been done to them.
3.) No I do not think that it is possible for the Human Genome Project to spur similar feelings, because the Human Genome Project is not that far in advancements. The Human Genome Project just finished decoded DNA/RNA, and are still looking at which genes cause what diseases, defects, or conditions. Maybe in the distant future it could be possible for us to make a healthier, more perfect child. And maybe in the VERY distant future we can have the option to pick and choose the qualities, features, and abilities of our children with the Human Genome Project. But then having children would be more like shopping. Saying I want blonde hair and green eyes for my child, rather than just taking a chance Even if this option does become possible in the future, I would expect it to be rather pricey, so that only the wealthy can afford it. And if only the wealthy can afford it would set an even bigger gap between the rich and poor.
1. I feel that the states do bear responsibility for what happened in the 20th century because they participated and enforced the law. In the case with North Carolina, they were doing it when sometimes the person didn’t even know. Eugenics was morally wrong and did not reflect what America stood for. For the victims that are still alive, they deserve a heavy compensation for what happened to them. What happened was wrong and a very dark time in American history. It’s not like you can give them back the ability to have children again. I feel that the living victims receiving $50,000 is a good start, even though it doesn’t change the fact that this happened. Also, acknowledging the fact that eugenics did occur is a step in the right direction and all states should begin to apologize for what happened.
3. Yes, I think that the Human Genome Project would probably spur similar sentiments because it’s about taking control to create a perfect child. To make the prefect child, you need to have perfect genes and that leads to saying who can have a child with who. It is taking control of people’s lives by saying they can’t marry someone. If that ever does happen, everyone’s going to want a genetically engineered baby. Then certain characteristics are going to be wiped out. For example, if everyone wants a child with blond hair, then the people with brown or red hair are going to start diminishing. It takes the naturalness of having a child away and you shouldn’t put science into something as sacred as having a child. This is similar to eugenics. It is taking control of people and how they live. Science should only use fetal manipulation if the child’s life is in danger, but I think people would respond to it the same way as they did with the eugenics.
1. I do think that the states that passed the laws of eugenics should take most of the responsibility. The people probably were not thinking to much about what would happen and passed the laws. There were 50 states and 28 of them chose the law and the other ones who did not choose the eugenics were thinking and made the right choice. The states knew that they could not do that to their citizens. It is not fair to just take away people reproductive rights just because of whom they are and if they have not done anything bad. I do think their should be something done with the surviving victims. They should be given back money or something, but they can not go back. The way North Carolina gave all the victims 50,000 dollars was pretty nice but it still is not enough for what is lost.
2. I do think that some of the responsibility should be in Carnegie institute and Rockefeller Foundation. All of the funding that was given with these philanthropic foundations was not good. The research could have gone into more important types of research. You can not just get rid of the bottom 10% because then you are going to always have a new bottom ten percent which makes this really nothing until everyone is gone. They were really just attempting to better society while they thought this was okay but is really detrimental to society. Since Carnegie and Rockefeller were so big at the time of this it was simple for the to get people to go with them. I do not think that this should ruin either of their reputation because they had done great things and this is something that was thought to turn out great but went wrong and was bad.
1. When it comes to the sterilization projects I do believe that the states bear some responsibility for these problems. It is all because of the states that something like this even happened in the first place because the doctors got consent from the State that allowed them to perform their actions. States and government officials passed the law for sterilization blindly without understanding the outcome of their actions. But if Social Darwism was more expressed then these sterilizations would have been avoided. So in conclusion, The States do share some of the blame because they were the ones who passed the law and now they’re regretting their actions.
3. Yes I believe it is possible because everyone in the world has their perfect child image deep in their brain and we all know what they look like, most of the world wants to have a child that is smart, no fat, blue eyes, athletic, and very smart. That’s pretty typical ,and The Scientist who want to create the perfect child will do nothing but have the same identical kid every single time. But no body is perfect in the world so how ever many times they try they aren’t going to get nothing but the same outcome a close to but not perfect child. So in conclusion I do think that Scientist and genomists tend to put in their personal images and opinions in the process of trying to make the perfect child.
1) Yes, I do firmly believe that states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century, but I don’t believe that the government of today is responsible for the mistakes other people have made. What I’m saying is that these people in government now aren’t the same people as the ones that were in government before, and they shouldn’t be treated so. While I do believe that the people who were ‘sterilized’ were harmed and deserve some sort of closure, I don’t think that throwing money at them is going to do anything. I know this sounds terrible and outrageous, but the sterile people were actually saved money, because they didn’t have to pay for the high cost of children. I mean, there isn’t much you can do. I guess they could have adopted, so you can’t really give them a kid… So the only option would be money, but how does one configure the amount of money a child is worth? As for what happened in the 60’s and 70’s, I believe that not only the people who performed these surgeries, but government, too, should be held accountable and punished.
2) Of course they do! It wasn’t just their fault, but they did play a part. Surely other people were into this whole eugenics thing…But the Carnegies and the Rockefellers were very well respected families, so they had the power to give a bill the little push it needs to be passed…Kinda like the Colbert-Bump of bills.
Kevin Dagenais
Period 2
1. I do believe that states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century because states had the choice to either pass the law or not. The states that passed it made a bad decision and the citizens eventually suffered greatly. The states that decided to not pass the law realized that this program violates the people’s rights and that it is a bad idea. Since many states did pass the law, many people that were sterilized in the 1960’s and the 1970’s that are still alive, are greatly affected. I believe that the state in which they live in should give them money or some kind of apology gift in order to make the sterilized citizens feel better. But in my opinion, just giving the sterilized citizens money or some kind of gift, does not fix the sterilized citizens’ frustrations or sadness nor does it buy forgiveness. I think that the States that passed the law made a huge mistake, and this action changed many people’s lives.
2. I do believe that philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundations do bear responsibility for this mess, but not ass much as the states do. This is because these companies only donated money to the program so it can be successful, but they did not pass the law. The people that donated the money knew what they were doing and what they were paying for. Also, these wealthy people were seen as role models, so any recommendations that they offered, was probably taken into consideration by the scientists. They thought that this program would help America, but it had a negative effect. I think that people shouldn’t be sterilized, and that marriages shouldn’t be restricted because people have the right to decide for themselves.
1.Yes, I think that the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that were passes in the early part of the 20th century because it was the states decision on whether not to pass the laws. Twenty-eight states agreed on passing the laws, which shows just how responsible they were. If it weren’t for those twenty-eight states that agreed, the laws would never have been passed in the first place. In my opinion, the surviving victims that are still living today such as women who could never have children, should be first in priority for adopting a child if they want. Also, they should be given a happy life since one of their sources of happiness-having kids, was taken away from them. I think any of the survivors who are struggling through life without a lot of money, should be given money to live off of to try and make up for the fact that they were treated terribly and unfairly.
2.I think that the philanthropic organizations such as the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation bear a responsibility in the eugenics mess. If it weren’t for these organizations helping to fund and build the idea of eugenics and the sterilization laws, then its quite likely that the laws would never have surfaced and been put into action. However, the help of the philanthropic organizations made it possible for the laws to be passed. Also, I think that the organizations brought attention to the laws because of their support in them, which could have helped to gain state votes. Both the money put into eugenics and the attention drawn to it made it successful and made the laws look necessary to some people. Although, these foundations weren’t completely responsible for the eugenics mess, they did help it progress a great deal.
1. These inhumane laws stripped innocent people of their rights over their own body. People wrongly worked behind the scenes to determine who had the right to have a child. They then took action by sterilizing these people, sometimes with out their knowledge. Nevertheless, over 60,000 Americans were suddenly incapable to reproduce because of a decision made by another person. These immoral authorities were taking a completely scientific approach to the matter. They were thinking for the benefit of the majority of the human race, rather than the happiness of the human race. Happiness is not acquired through being “fit”. Yes, being intelligent, successful, and adequate would all serve as privileges in one’s life. However, they would not determine their happiness as a whole. Happiness is obtained through love, companionship, and acceptance, none of which being found through these laws. Therefore, these laws were ignorant towards what’s important, happiness rather than fitness. Considering the most unfortunate fact that these evil authorities were indeed those who were in power of the states, it can be concluded that they DEFINITELY take full responsibility. Compensation for their acts is impossible. Depriving a person of their happiness, of a child, cannot be accounted for. Therefore, as an act of punishment towards the state governments, those who are still alive and who were sterilized in the 1960s-1970s should receive some form of repayment. This should include a sincere apology and remorse from the government, and some form of money.
3. Yes, the Human Genome Project could definitely spur similar sentiments about fetal manipulation, considering their objectives are very much the same – to create a better, “fitter” species. This motive or goal has been the cause of two immoral revolutions so far in recent history. The Holocaust and the Human Genome Project. Some may say that it’s unfair to compare the terribleness of the Human Genome Project to the Holocaust, but really it’s just two different ways of achieving the same goal – the fitness of the human race. The Holocaust was the most violent, the Human Genome Project reduced in violence, and therefore my expectations are an even less violent approach, fetal manipulation. It seems that humans aren’t learning from their mistakes. They are more worried about the rate of violence rather than the motives. They continue to reduce the violence used to achieve these goals, however the still wrongly try to tweak and fix the next generation. In conclusion, since humans aren’t learning from their mistakes, I believe that fetal manipulation will probably become popular.
Answering question one, I do believe states are responsible for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early 20th century. Being the government, we, the people, hope our system is fair and honest and loyal. But when they are going behind victim’s backs and doing activities the victims have not approved, the government just crossed a line (because of the 9th amendment, saying just because it is not in the Constitution, doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist). The surviving victims may or may not know what had been done to them. Those of the victims that DO know they were sterilized, and are still alive today, need some sort of “give-back” from the government. This “give-back” could come as money, healthcare (possibly for the poorer individuals), etc. It’s not exactly easy to pin-point an exact match to what so many had to give up, but the compensation would possibly bring a little relief to some families.
In regards to question two, I do believe the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear responsibility for this mess. When involuntary sterilization came around, they were planning on destroying 14 million American, men, women, and children. Nobody can make that choice for you: whether you want to try for a child, or not. The companies provided the resources (money, eugenicists, materials, etc.), so why shouldn’t they be to blame? Also, the fact that this was studied at big-name universities, like the Ivy League schools, makes the situation a little worse. In my perspective, I see education (the back-bone of America…the idea I was always told as a child is the one thing in life that can get you anywhere and nowhere at the same time – depending on how you look at it) in the time-period sponsoring this, as if to say taking away so-called free individuals rights away from them.
1.States are definitely responsible for the eugenics laws passed against the lower 10%. They didn’t have to be influenced by these eugenics “scientists” and they caused a whole bunch of pain for the people that they sterilized or euthanized. The state governments had a choice to pass these laws and since they did. The fact that more than half of all the states passed these laws is very upsetting. The fact that maybe the reason why the other states didn’t pass eugenics laws was because they knew it was wrong, but the other half didn’t is very disturbing. I don’t think any kind of compensation can fix the fact that these people’s rights were violated and they now are forever sterile. If the victims want money, I think it would be a small little step toward forgiveness. Still, I feel that there really isn’t a true way to pay for the damages done to these people.
3. It is definitely not a outlandish statement to say that the Human Genome Project could have people thinking about genetic manipulation. Combined with the idea of eugenics it would be very possible for people to start thinking about genetic manipulation in fetuses. A great example of that idea in modern literature is in the boom Toys, By James Patterson. The book explains a utopian world where humans are genetically modified to be better than normal humans. This example shows that even today, the idea of changing our genetics is still very much thought about. I think that if the Human Genome Project was completed back at the peak of eugenics then I think there would be attempts at altering a fetus to become healthier or better. Nowadays, I don’t believe people would act on these feelings, however because of the whole stem cell debate.
Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
Yes states are responsible. The sate used their powers to forces their inhumane policies onto the people. In some instances they tricked people, or young girl’s parents were convinced by doctors and signed off on the procedure. These policies were mostly aimed at the poor. It was part of the idea that people didn’t want to pay for the poor’s welfare. But no matter what it was aimed at sterilization like that can only happen if the state uses their power, private persons cannot control people to get sterilized. These policies were instated partly because of the misunderstanding of Darwin’s theory of “survival of the fittest”. If you had undesirable qualities, you’d be targeted. These were ideologies that were perversions of a scientific theory that was not understood. Genes are very complex and combine in many unique ways. The more diverse the population is the healthier selection because of the different types of people. Even if they’re had been right, it was such a fundamental violation of human rights. It was so grossly evil, that you could deny a person the right to be a parent because they didn’t meet your standards. It was such an intrusive procedure. For that reason the state that was involved deserves to have the responsibility to compensate the persons hurt. But still, no matter how much money you give someone, it will never fully compensate them. How can you say that the opportunity to have a child can be paid for?
Is it possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child? Why or why not?
The Human Genome Project has pointed out how amazingly complex the human genome is and how unpredictable it can be. The attempts to do that kind of engineering would backfire. The possibility of creating a perfect child right now is now where in sight. The problem is we will end up with too much of the same thing. It is apparent that parents are trying to use an excessive amount of control on their child, or soon to be child, by picking out the traits most desirable in todays society. Whatever happened to unconditional love? How can you say that when you said, “my child must look a certain way,” and “I want this and this and this in my child”? It is so creepy and bad. In the future there may be some controversy. But, none in the near future.
2. Yes, I believe that philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation had responsibility in this mess. They had a choice wheatear to help out with research/support this, and they chose yes. They had free will to say no and try to put a stop to this, but they helped it continue to grow. Even though they didn’t have the initial idea, they did help it prosper and for that they should also be held accountable. Because of their help and research60, 000 people had the right to have a family forcefully taken from them. They shouldn’t get off with no charge or blame just because they were the background workers, not on the main scene. Even if they found some people whose family was full of feeble-minded people or drunks doesn’t always mean they will also be one. If someone truly wants to, they can change their life, but we will now never know what other great people could have come from that age because some officials decided to try to play God and decided who the next generation would be.
3. The Human Genome Project could definitely spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child. In this day and age, people are obsessed with appearances and would want the best they could have. It would become a competition of whose child is best, prettier, smarter, faster, anything. It would spark a fight between perfection. And it wouldn’t stop there. Jobs would only accept the best, those who had their DNA manipulated with when they were a fetus. People would begin to try to be supreme and pick the best genes, which could in fact still kill the baby as a fetus if even the smallest error is made. Soon the world would be filled with people who all think they’re better than others just because of certain genes then someone else.
2.) Yes, I think philanthropic organizations such as the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation were very responsible for the eugenics mess. I believe this because the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation directly chose to donate their money to the eugenics program. The Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation were not required in any way to donate money to this awful program. Both organizations could have donated that money to public libraries, and things of that matter that would actually help the community, instead of spending it on bogus science. I’m sure that both philanthropic organizations knew exactly what their money was going toward, and that is why they should be responsible for some of the blame. Also, had the organizations not donated the money, the program probably wouldn’t have gone as far as it did, and it may have even prevented the holocaust. This is because the German eugenics program was modeled after the American eugenics program. So, if the eugenics program wasn’t supported in America, Germany wouldn’t have had a program to base theirs off of.
3.) Yes, I feel like it is possible for the Human Genome Project to spur feelings of fetal manipulation in order to create a healthy, more perfect child. I feel this way because the human genome project alters the genes of a fetus, and could potentially eliminate disorders and other diseases. It would be similar to getting rid of the lowest ten percent of the population in the sense that everyone would be equally as smart without cutting off the reproduction rights of the lowest ten percent of the population. Also, it probably wouldn’t be very hard to do this with today’s technology. I’m sure that there are still some people in this world that support eugenics. If it did spur feelings, I feel as though it could cause a eugenics epidemic because of the fact that every nation wants to have the smartest citizens and the best technology.
2. Yes, I do believe that the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation have to do with sterilization laws that were passed. Taking the way the human right of reproduction is in my mind a very big deal and both the Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation took part in the writing and passing of sterilization laws. They also funded research for the sterilization. They were a major influence on politics back then, so in a way they controlled part of the government or at least manipulated it into doing what they wanted. I think that anyone that had anything to do with this should be held responsible no matter how big or small a role they had if it because they are just as much to blame as the government and you can’t even compensate people enough for the tragedy that they caused.
3. Yes, I think it is possible that the Human Genome Project could spur the same feelings about fetal manipulation. People who can afford it will probably pay very large amounts of money to have their family gene of brain cancer or even something not as serious as arthritis removed as a possibility for their son or daughter. I also think that people who are having things like this taken care of will also want to give their child blonde hair and blue eyes even though no one in their family has ever had blonde hair and blue eyes. People will want to state making their children so genetically perfect that it will eliminate the differences between people and it will take away that element of who we are and what separates us from everyone else. I wouldn’t be surprised that for a couple that can’t have children or a man or woman wants to raise a child on their own that they will be able to go to a hospital or some kind of medical office and in a sense build their own baby.
1. I think that states do bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws. States began to write the laws in the early 20th century restricting the marriage and reproductive rights of the population they deemed unfit to pass on their traits. Even though many supporters of these laws had good intentions – to protect society from crime and disease – they went about it in an unjust way. Having good intentions does not relieve one of the responsibility of their actions. Also, these “good intentions” were often a mask for just plain prejudice and the twisted desire to eliminate differences. Even though most of the politicians nowadays were not involved at all in the eugenics program in the early 1900s, they still represent the states that initiated it. States need to admit that the choice they made to support these laws was extremely misguided and horrible. Even if they can’t reverse the sterilizations they enforced, it is still important that they own up to their mistakes and make every effort they can to improve the lives of their victims, by apologizing and compensating with healthcare and/or money.
3. I think it is highly possible that the Human Genome Project could cause similar controversy to the eugenics program. Scientists are now capable of identifying and manipulating genes, and this could lead to many issues. One issue is whether or not to test unfertilized eggs for various traits and disabilities. This way, parents can decide which egg they want, based on appearance and health. Like the eugenics program, it also determines which traits are being passed on. While the advantage is that a healthy child could be brought into this world, the disadvantage is that it deprives another egg of a potential life, even if it is a life made difficult by disabilities. Should children be brought around by nature, even if it is full of risk, or should they be artificially selected? Is it ethical to tamper with the next generation? Another issue is the danger of gene manipulation. Could it be possible to endanger the human race even while trying to improve it? Overall, I think that we should use the Human Genome Project for identifying disabilities, but not trying to prevent them at a molecular scale. Trying to eradicate natural problems can lead to even more problems.
1. I think that the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation bear responsibility in the situation involving the eugenics. I think this because they were the companies that funded the eugenics and without money, the eugenics would not have been able to cause a situation like this one. The organizations should have known what they were investing in when they gave the money to the eugenics. I do not believe that they are fully responsible, but they are an accomplice. The organizations were supporting the eugenics when they gave them the funding, which meant somewhere inside of them they believed what the eugenics were right (which it was not) and that makes them have responsibility for the eugenic situation. The Carnegie Institute and the Rockefeller Foundation were a part of a long domino effect and the organizations were the first domino. After the eugenics were funded, they were all set to go with equipment and everything else they needed came from the state; who is also responsible.
2. The states do bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws passed in the early twentieth century. The states are responsible for the laws that were passed because they passed them, and they supported a group of “scientists” telling many people of their own state that they were unfit. By passing those laws, the states were agreeing to the whole eugenic idea of people being better than other people because of their genes. Also, they allowed people to go around sterilizing other “unfit” people because in their minds, those people were unfit. Our government is supposed to make logical decisions that would better the country for the citizens it lives in, and telling some people that they cannot reproduce because they have “bad genes” is not logical and it is unethical. So, yes the states do bear responsibility for their wrong-doings in this eugenic era.
1. I do think that the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th century. 28 states made laws about making a life worthless and disposable. That means that more than half of the Country that prides itself in being a free country, made a valuable life nothing more than quality control. So many people were sterilized without their consent or knowledge. Bearing children became impossible to people who wanted nothing more than to be a parent. The people who were sterilized should have a compensation for the suffering they were put through. No amount of money should be the price of a life, but the victims should be paid some large amount for the suffering they had to endure. Not only should the victims be given money, but I think that the victims should be acknowledge and apologized to for the freedom it took away from its citizens. It’s sad that a country that worked so hard for their own independence 200 years before, still took away the independence for people to make their own decisions.
2. I do think that the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation should bear some responsibility in the eugenics mess. The philanthropic organizations help to found and fund the ideas and methods of taking away simple human rights. The organizations didn’t realize that these laws were taking away the rights of the citizens of the country. The organizations also didn’t stand up for the potential fourteen million people who would be affected by this insane law. I believe that it is not right for anyone to choose for someone whether or not they could have kids. And no one should have the ability to deem who is a fit parent or not. The country can’t take back what they did, but I think this needs to be acknowledged as a mistake and the United States should learn from this.
1. I whole-heartedly believe that the state is fully responsible for the sterilization laws passed in the early 20th century. Those laws revoked people’s right to marry the one they loved and have children. There is no greater pain on earth than knowing you will never have your own child to raise. I honestly have no idea what can be done for the poor victims of such an arrogant, mind-less, sickening time. The best thing that they could do already happened; they got rid of the laws that barred these Americans from experiencing the two happiest times of your life, getting married and having a kid. Money and/or a formal apology cannot satisfy the gut wrenching reality that they could not be spouses or the parent of their own child. And since nobody has invented a way to unsterylize people, the states should take full responsibility for robbing many people of their God given rights.
3. I believe it is fully possible for the Human Genome Project to spur similar sentiments. The “perfect child” theory is based on the idea that it is possible to scientifically match up two people that could mate and birth a child with no flaws, no mental issues, no athletic issues, the perfect child. One example is Yao Ming. The Chinese government found Ming’s parents from two different parts of China and asked them to mate and birth the future NBA star, Yao Ming. He was thought to be the “perfect child”. At age twelve he stood an astonishing 6’2. He is now 7’6, a perfect height for a center. However “perfection” came with a cost, he suffered many leg, knee, as well as back and ankle injuries. To conclude I fully believe it is possible for the Human Genome Project to spur sentiments, but striving for “perfection” may lead you to a much deeper sense of “imperfection” than they could ever imagine.
1. I believe that the states do bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws they passed in the early part of the 20th Century. When the states did this, they were making life decisions for their citizens without giving them the freedom of coming to their own consciences about how they should go about their life. Forcing their citizens to do this is basically saying that your child or children wouldn’t be suitable and doesn’t deserve to live in our state or at all. It is wrong and inhumane to decide the path that another human being should make on life and the states should take full responsibility for their retaliation on the census reports given. There is nothing that the states can do to make up for the wrong they did to the sterilized victims. Anything that is done wouldn’t be able to replace the fact that now these citizens will have less family members in the generations to come. For the people who are still alive from the 1960’s and 1970’s that were sterilized, whatever the state does to make themselves feel less guilty about what transpired will be good, but it will never be enough.
3. The Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child because this is exactly what the state was trying to do for their population of citizens. The state wanted people to create citizens who they saw fit for life and this is exactly what people will be creating. If this does transpire, any person who creates a child who is society wise “unfit” for living would be treated differently than the “perfect” children. Any manipulation of genes is morally wrong and would cause hatred among citizens. Instead of having a perfect society life would be segregated and people wouldn’t be happy about the things being done.
1. Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
No I don’t not think states bear the responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they have passed in early parts of the 20th century. It’s give them too much power because one state could do it, and then right next to it the other states are around it and it could cause conflict between the states. Its better keep but the government to control it and the people choice of every state to decide this new law. But the surviving victims especially the ones who are still alive should receive like a reward, notion or maybe money to restore and hold the future of their new family’s that they could have a better future then what their parents and grandparents had coming to them without them even knowing it.
2. Is it possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child? Why or why not?
Yes it could be possible in the future that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a perfect child with no health problem etc… but this could turn every bad very fast first only some people would be able to get the treatment ( hint the rich) and second if they started changing genes and mixing with this kind of stuff they could ruin something in our system or change something to make it all mess up not saying like them becoming god and can decide how you’re going to be. But like a revisable thing that could change some life forever. Wouldn’t that suck to know later in life that your different then everyone else and you didn’t live a normal life trying to figure stuff out on your own but your parents made this decision . Like I said stuff could get very bad very quickly.
1. I think that the states bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century, because it was not a law to America as a whole each state was allowed to make it’s own decisions on whether or not the laws would be passed and they chose to endanger their own citizens and didn’t think of the outcome. They should have stopped to think and realized that the laws were wrong and dangerous. The surviving victims are in a difficult place because no matter what we do to help they will always not be able to have children and their true problem won’t actually be fixed, but I do think they should be acknowledged and the people responsible still alive today should do as much as they can to make these women feel better.
3. I defiantly think it is possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about making a perfect child. Who doesn’t want the perfect child? It would lead to much more success and advantage t other children, but at the same time part of the magic is not knowing the exact outcome and when the child is born seeing the resemblance. Changing the overall look of the child makes the process a business transaction not a happy occasion. You won’t have a child that is unique, and all children will lose their special value. I think until it is completely understood could start to tamper with our fragile society, people aren’t ready for that kind of responsibility now and even in the near future. Until altering genes is perfected it is not wise to even think about something like that.
1. I think that the states do bear some responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. Even though the people that enforced these decades ago are not the same people working for the state now, some of the people who were involuntarily sterilized are still alive and wish that they could have had the chance to have kids. For the surviving victims, especially the ones who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s, there is not much that can be done to make up for the way they were treated. They could not have kids, against their will. However, like North Carolina, the states could give payment to the victims that are still alive to apologize for what happened to them. It doesn’t make up for what happened, but it is all that can be done at this point. North Carolina is paying each victim $50,000. I think that this is a fair amount, considering they have to pay that much for each person. Although what happened to them is very sad, it can’t be undone, and at least North Carolina is addressing the issue at all, and doing their best to ensure that the victims receive something for what they have gone through.
3. I think it is possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child. A lot of people would never do this because they want their baby to be completely natural. There is no such thing as the “perfect child,” but some people these days feel like they need things to be perfect in order to be happy. It would be helpful, however, to create a healthier baby so they are not always sick.
1)States are definitely responsible for the compulsory sterilization laws. They were the ones to pass the laws in the first place. The states were not as responsible for enforcing the laws, though. Even though those 28 states made the Eugenics policies laws, they could have narrowed the faction down. To those victims still alive today, we should compensate them somehow. A price can’t be put on a life; but enough money could help ease the feelings about the problem, and help in this economy that we are in. About $25,000 would be enough to give victims. It’s not too much because it happened so long ago and being too expensive, but so little so that it is un-meaningful and insignificant. Along with the pay off should be a public apology and announcement to all of the victims and their families. This would bring awareness to the communistic assembly and to everybody else.
2)Both the Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation definitely deserved blame for being tied in with the tube tiers. They basically sponsored and donated enough money for the programs and organizations to run, which was important especially because it was mostly in the beginning of the process coming about. The people from the Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundation kick started the idea and into powerful eyes. They did not have to worry about the effects back on them because they are not in the bottom class. They were much higher up. They didn’t view the poor as unfortunate, but as disgusting and self made that ill fated. As much as they had a part, they are least to blame for any of this than anybody or anything else. They played the smallest part in that it wasn’t very direct, but they did also play a major part because they had power.
1. Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
States bear a great deal of responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century. The states knew what they were doing and they knew that it was not the most right or just thing to do but they still did it. The states had the power to nullify the laws and not use them, nevertheless they still sterilized thousands. They were taking rights away from people that should have had equal rights to everyone else. In addition I think it is absolutely wrong that the main target was women because the states did not know the source of the baby (if they were pregnant). Some women could have gotten themselves pregnant but other could have been raped, therefore it would not be their fault. For those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s should be given a profound accommodation for the trauma they had to go through. Right now some states are trying to pay the victims a large sum of money, but I think that the states should have to apologize to all victims and help the families of the victims as well. They states had a choice and they should have taken the chance to not sterilize them.
2. Do you think the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear any responsibility in this mess? Why or why not?
Yes, the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear some responsibility. I believe this because the used their power to persuade people to not have children. In addition they were planning to pass marriage laws that restrict some people from getting married. Furthermore the philanthropic organizations were giving the state money to, this money made eugenics possible. They were trying to control who could have kids and make humans better by only allowing the fittest to have children. Even though they did not physically cause eugenics they do play a part.
Blog-Stephen Brown
1.Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done to those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
Just like in a family, a country has a legacy that precedes them. Public opinion of them is based on the counties whole history. They might not have necessarily been at fault for the sterilization, but they do need to make amends. To me, this seems similar to Native American in America in that the state made amends to fix past mistakes. The same sort of thing should be done here, if only from a moral standpoint. As for the surviving victims, they deserve compensation for being forcefully stripped of their fertility.
3. Is it possible that the Human Genome Project could spur similar sentiments or feelings about fetal manipulation in order to create a healthier, more perfect child? Why or why not?
This is a slippery slope. This issue is often brought up whenever cloning and the human genome product is mentioned. It’s entirely possible that similar sentiment could be brought about by the genome project. People almost unanimously agree that science to advance the health of people is positive. The tricky part comes in when the idea of perfect is introduced. It’s entirely possible though, that as soon as it’s scientifically viable there will be “Baby Boutiques” where you can “design” your baby. This will come about innocently at first. Proponents will tout that they can now modify an embryo to detect, and cure, deadly disease. As the practice becomes more commonplace these scientist will move on to other, less deadly, imperfections. By eliminating traits that are deemed “imperfect”, they will begin their purge. The only thing that will slow them is public opinion. I feel people who design children will suffer in the same way that people who have abortions are. Looked down too, many believe it’s immoral and such. But, it is impossible to avoid and the sentiment will surely pop up and eventually be embraced.
1. Do states bear any responsibility for the compulsory sterilization laws that they had passed in the early part of the 20th Century? Why or why not? If so, what should be done for those surviving victims, especially the ones who are still alive who were sterilized in the 1960s or 1970s?
– I think that the states do not bear responsibility for the compulsory sterilizations laws that they passed. I think that the reason the states passed the laws was just so that the other states wouldn’t get mad at them for not doing it. I feel like everyone knew this was a foolish law, but no one was brave enough to step up in front of the government and say, “Look, this doesn’t make any sense.” I think that to be completely honest there is really nothing that you can do for the people who are still alive and were sterilized. Their lives were ruined just because of a racist group of people. They will never be able to have children again, just because of a stupid law. It isn’t like they could have undone it, because the technology those days weren’t strong enough too. They just to accept the fact that their lives were ruined by an ignorant group of people.
2. Do you think the philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundation bear any responsibility in this mess? Why or why not?
– I definitely think that philanthropic organizations like Carnegie Institute or Rockefeller Foundations bear responsibility. This whole mess probably wouldn’t have been possible if it were not for them. Those companies are the ones who sponsored the eugenicists to get the law out there. If it weren’t for those companies the mess would not have been possible because it wouldn’t have had any funding. The articles states that with the “help” of these companies the eugenicists got the word out, so they did have responsibility for the mess.
Emily S. – 5th Hour
1. Yes, all of the states involved in the sterilizations should be held responsible for the sterilizations in the earliest 20th century. It doesn’t matter if they didn’t sterilize them themselves or that those laws don’t exist anymore. Those people still had a life without children against their will and had no say in whether they could have more children. The sterilizations were done without the woman’s knowing and no matter how late in the century it gets, that is still wrong and the states should be accountable for their actions. The pain and suffering that those woman had to go through for so many years happened no matter what part of the 20th century it is. they should get some kind of compensations, like money, for what they’ve been through and the completely unfair treatment that they were dealt.
3. I feel that with the Human Genome Project the parents would know what was happening. The manipulations of their child are done willingly and the same issue wouldn’t come up. The problem with the sterilizations in the early 20th century was that the girls didn’t know that they were being sterilized. The manipulation of genes most likely has a lot of legal things that need to be processed and is more organized than the eugenics. The feelings about The Human Genome project and eugenics may be the same though. A lot of people don’t like the idea of manipulating a fetus, myself included, so even though it’s legal; people might feel the same way about the human genome project that they did about eugenics. I don’t believe that they’d have the same outcome due to the legalities and the fact that the parents have to consent to have their fetus tampered with. But the feelings towards eugenics and the Human Genome Project could be the same.
Mady T. – 4th Hr.