A little eugenics between friends

The New York Times ran an interesting interview with Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg last week in which she said, in part...

Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.

You can read the whole context here.

May I just say that the lack of attention given to this comment is rather astounding to me, and others. I first read about it when a friend linked to this blog article by Damian Thompson at the UK Telegraph. He quoted at the Creative Minority blog, which said in part...

What the heck is going on here? What are we to make of the media's complete silence on this issue? They don't see a little eugenics between friends as a big deal?...As the large metropolitan newspapers die, they're wondering "why?" This is why...The Times didn't bother to ask her who the populations were that "we" didn't want too many of or even who the "we" consisted of. In fact, nobody has.

The road between eugenics and abortion is a well traveled one. Margaret Sanger, founder and heroine of Planned Parenthood, was in favor of "negative eugenics, a social philosophy which claims that human hereditary traits can be improved through social intervention." She advocated weeding out the negative genetic factors in the black population through abortion and sterilization.

Our culture of death marches on seemingly unchallenged.