Monday, September 17, 2012

The Problem with Eugenics

   Margaret Sanger (1883-1966) served as a public health nurse on the Lower East Side of New York City where she encountered poor families and became convinced that population control was the premier way to deal with the issue of poverty in the United States.
   In 1916, Mrs. Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in New York City for the purpose, as described by Planned Parenthood, of providing reproductive information and assistance to men and women who might not otherwise be able to afford it. On the surface, this sounds rather benign; however, when one carefully examines the philosophy of the organization’s founder and reads her own words, the reader is left with a much different impression of Mrs. Sanger.
   It is quite evident that Mrs. Sanger was a major proponent of eugenics Eugenics, from the Greek words eu-genos (meaning “good birth”) is defined as:
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).1
   In 1921, Mrs. Sanger stated, “Eugenics is… the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political, and social problems.”2 Her philosophy involved various avenues of implementation. A proponent of abortion, at a time when it was illegal, Sanger stated, “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”3 She also proposed the belief that “birth control must ultimately lead to a cleaner race.”4 In regard to birth control she also stated:
As an advocate of birth control, I wish…to point out that the unbalance of the birth rate between the “fit” and “unfit” admitted the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between the two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation… On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.5
   Based upon her writings, it appears that she was also convinced that the poor should be sterilized as a way of preventing them from reproducing. Mrs. Sanger stated, “Eugenics sterilization is an urgent need…We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”6
   If her comments appear to echo the teachings of Adolf Hitler, this should come as no surprise. While I am not proposing that Mrs. Sanger was a Nazi, the fact remains that what she proposed was accepted as completely valid by the Third Reich. The Nazi belief that there were certain people who were not worthy of life was stated by Mrs Sanger in 1922 when she wrote:

   “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism... [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant. We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all..."7
   A “dead weight of human waste” is how these children, who were made in the image and likeness of God, were seen by Mrs. Sanger. There is no necessity to embellish Mrs. Sanger’s comments since the very words she wrote give a clear and exact explanation of her philosophy. She went on to say, "The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind."8
   The interesting thing is that term “feeble minded” appears to have a rather fluid definition when used by Mrs. Sanger. The traditional definition of feeble mindedness is one who has only a limited capacity to learn or understand. Does the fact that these people would not agree with her philosophy make them, by definition, feeble minded? Nowhere in the definition is there a listing for “a refusal to accept arrogance” as a criteria for feeble mindedness.
   Not surprisingly, Mrs. Sanger directly challenged the teachings of the Catholic Church and others who believe in the sanctity of human life:

"The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped."9
   Apparently having religious convictions qualifies one as “feeble minded” according to Mrs. Sanger.
   Recently U S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton received the Margaret Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood. Mrs Clinton stated that she was “in awe” of Mrs. Sanger and stated that Mrs Sanger’s “life and leadership was one of the most transformational in the entire history of the human race.” Given Mrs. Sanger’s philosophy, the very same thing could easily be said of Adolf Hitler.
   Speaking on the floor of the U S House of Representatives, Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ) challenged the fact that Mrs Clinton visited the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe immediately before receiving the Margaret Sanger award. Appearing to St Juan Diego at Tepeyac, Mexico on December 12, 1531, as a pregnant woman, the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title of Our Lady of Guadalupe is both the patroness of the Americas and of the pro-life movement.
   After briefly narrating the story of the apparitions of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Congressman Smith stated, “last Thursday, Hillary Clinton visited the shrine On Friday, she paid homage to Planned Parenthood and to Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger is the founder of Planned Parenthood. She was a self-described pro-abortionist eugenist and a racist who considered charity care for impoverished, disenfranchised women, including women of color, especially pregnant women to be ‘cruel’.”10
   The teachings of Margaret Sanger are not worthy of emulation. Eugenics is not an acceptable form of scientific research. However, this does not mean that it is not practiced. On Saturday, February 21, 2009, Pope Benedict XVI warned participants at a conference sponsored by the Pontifical Academy for Life of the rise of a “new eugenics” which judges the worth of a person based upon his or her genetic makeup, as expressed in factors such as health and beauty. Statistics show that in many Western nations up to ninety-five (95) percent of unborn children diagnosed in utero with Down syndrome are killed in their mother’s womb before birth. Recently it was announced that a screening technique is in development that may enable the diagnosis of autism in utero. Critics have said that such a test will inevitably lead to the eugenic abortion of children with autism.11 Even though some might argue that this would never happen, the fact remains that we see very few children with Down syndrome anymore. Some would like us to believe it is because modern science has found a cure for this syndrome; however, the fact is that these children are simply denied the right to live.
   The fact that prospective parents can actually pre-determine the eye color and other characteristics of their child prior to birth has a certain “Frankenstein-like” quality about it. The idea of in utero genetic screening is the logical conclusion when one follows the methodology of people like Margaret Sanger. Ideas truly do have consequences. Once again, it is the Catholic Church which is standing up and saying, “This is not acceptable.” People like Pope Benedict XVI, Congressman Christopher Smith, and others need to be encouraged in their efforts to continue to stand up for the truth. The legacy of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood should be presented for what is it, a violation of the God given right to life of the most defenseless among us.

   Such profound philosophical questions as, who has the right to play God?, certainly did not begin with the Nazis or Margaret Sanger, but we are able to see the consequences of these teachings.  Earlier in history there were other authors who wrote about this same topic.  For example, Mary Shelley (1797-1851) wrote about this exact same theme in her most famous novel, Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus (1818), which deals with the consequences of Dr. Frankenstein’s experiments with bringing the dead back to life. 
    In 1925, Mikhail Bulgakov (1891-1940), a Russian physician turned author, wrote a story entitled Собачье сердце (The Heart of a Dog). The summary of this story is as follows: A bedraggled street dog is about to perish in the cold winter night, after having been scalded by boiling water earlier in the day. Suddenly, an elegant man feeds him and takes him home. The dog's savior is a famous and wealthy medical professor, Philip Philippovich Preobrazhensky, who rejuvenates people by hormonal manipulations.
    As soon as the dog becomes accustomed to his new life of plenty, he finds himself the subject of a strange experiment--the professor and his assistant implant the testicles and pituitary gland of a dead criminal into the dog's body. After a rocky post-operative course, the dog gradually begins to change into an animal in human form and names himself Poligraph Poligraphovich Sharikov. The half-beast-half-man, who gets along very well in the prevailing proletarian society, turns his creator's life into a nightmare--until the professor manages to reverse the procedure.12
    Comparisons were made between Bulgakov’s “dog-man” character and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein monster.  However, in the case of Frankenstein everyone who encountered the creature rejected it because it was so unnatural.  Poligraph Sharikov is equally unnatural, but fits in quite well in 1920s Russian society.  The Bolsheviks came to power by convincing the people that they needed to get rid of Czar Nicholas II and share all things in common.  In no time at all, these same people slowly began to turn on the very people that put them into power. The highly educated were banished from Russia and those who did not leave were eventually executed.
    Every generation comes up with an idea which they are convinced are both new and original.  Eugenics is one of these ideas.  As a result of the Second World War, eugenics is now associated with Nazi Germany; however, even without the Nazi connection eugenics is still problematic.  If we do not learn the lessons of history we are prone to repeat them over and over again. 

                                                        End Notes


2 Margaret Sanger "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda" Birth Control Review, October 1921, p 5

3 Margaret Sanger (editor), The Woman Rebel, Vol 1, No 1, Reprinted in Woman and the New Race (NY: Brentanos Publishers), 1922

4 Margaret Sanger Woman, Morality, and Birth Control (New York: New York Publishing Company), 1922 p 12

5 Margaret Sanger "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda " Birth Control Review, October 1921, p 5

6 Margaret Sanger Birth Control Review, April 1933

7 Margaret Sanger The Pivot of Civilization, 1922 Chapter on "The Cruelty of Charity," pp 116, 122, and 189 (Swarthmore College Library edition)

8 Margaret Sanger quoted in Charles Valenza "Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?" Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, p 44

9 Margaret Sanger Speech quoted in "Birth Control: What It Is, How It Works, What It Will Do" The Proceedings of the First American Birth Control Conference Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-12, 1921 Published by the Birth Control Review, Gothic Press, pp 172 and 174.


11 Pope Warns of Proliferation of New Eugenics: (Posted 2/24/09, Accessed 4/13/09)


 

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Поиск Счастья

Есть различные вещи, которые делают одну культуру отличной от другой,
включая музыку, живопись, обычаи и традиции. Однако, общее для всех
культур –– это легенды,сказки. Эти мифические истории присутствуют в
каждой культуре.
В американских историях Золушка, Златовласка, Три Медведя,
Принцесса на Горошине были очень популярны у разных поколений
детей. Многие из этих историй описывают путь поиска счастья. Этот путь
может быть пожизненным, а в некоторых случаях, даже никогда и не
достижимым.
Многие дети знакомы со сказкой Рапунцель писателей Братьев Гримм.
По всему миру известны также Гадкий Утенок и многие другие сказки
Ганса Христиана Андерсена. Эти сказки часто имеют счастливый конец.
Некоторые из этих историй заканчиваются встречей принцессы и принца.
Существует эпическая легенда, близкая к сказке, и в России. На берегу
озера герой этой легенды Садко играет на гуслях (древнерусский струнный
музыкальный инструмент, подобный лире). Морскому Царю нравится
его музыка и он предлагает ему помощь. Садко должен сделать ставку
с местными торговцами о ловли рыбы в озере и когда он ловит её с
помощью Морского Царя, то выигрывает пари, согласно которому
торговцы должны заплатить ему хорошую сумму.
Садко решает помочь крестьянам родного города Новгорода и сообщает
им о птице счастья, которая существует где-то по середине моря. Он
использует своё богатство, чтобы построить ряд судов и начинает эту
поездку, в надежде найти птицу счастья.
После поиска по различным уголкам мира, он наконец заканчивает
свой путь в Индии. Один из мужчин узнал, что птица счастья принадлежит
местному принцу. Садко соглашается сыграть партию шахмат с ним.
По договору, Садко может взять птицу Феникс (которая каждый раз
возрождается к жизни из собственного пепла), если он выигрывает эту
партию, и отдать собственную лошадь, если он проиграет индийскому
принцу.
В этой легенде Садко показан также романтиком и мечтателем.
Поэтому мать его возлюбленной Любавы считает его бесперспективным
женихом, "ни на что не годным" и советует дочери избегать его. Однако
дочь не может принять её решения. Садко рассказывает Любаве о
желании найти птицу счастья, и она согласна с этим, поскольку это
желание находится в его сердце. Она обещает ждать его всё это время.
И хотя Любава не получает известий от Садко в течении двух лет, она
думает о нем каждый день.
Садко выигрывает шахматное состязание с индийским принцем и берёт
птицу счастья с собой. Но вскоре он понимает, что птица не приносит
ему счастья. Он тоскует по дому и рассказывает об этом купцам, которые
собираются возвратиться в Новгород.
После этого он заключает соглашение с Морским Царём, согласно
которому он должен предложить дань взамен его богатства. Однако
Садко не полностью выполняет это соглашение. Когда корабль Садко
возвращается домой, то попадает в шторм и все суда оказываются под
угрозой гибели. Тогда Садко старается умилостивить Морского Царя
золотом. Однако всё напрасно и Садко оказывается в глубине моря. Он
опять играет на гуслях для Морского Царя, после чего тот предлагает ему
свою дочь в жёны. 1
Садко погружается в глубокий сон. После пробуждения он оказывается на
берегу родного Новгорода и видит Любаву. Возможно счастье, которое он
искал в другом месте, могло найти его только дома ?
Любава – образец прекрасной русской души. Она верна своему
возлюбленному и не разочаровывается в нем, независимо от ситуации.
Только такая любовь и преданность может принести истинное счастье.
Так что же значит “найти своё счастье”? Ответ на этот вопрос не
простой. У разных людей счастье понимается по разному. Одно лишь
очевидно. Трудно найти счастье вне себя, если ты несчастлив. Надеяться,
что другой человек может сделать тебя счастливым не верно и такой
путь не может принести нужные результаты. Если вы полагаетесь на
другого человека, чтобы стать счастливым, то вы рассматриваете другого
человека как средство достижения счастья. Без ощущения внутреннего
счастья вы обречены, так как каждый станет несчастным с "объектом" их
счастья и вероятно начнет искать другого, чтобы принести ему счастье.
В легенде Садко важными являются факты о ценности любви и
преданности, а поиск счастья также происходит в собственном сердце.
Именно там счастье должно быть прежде всего, перед тем как его находят
где-нибудь еще. Садко узнал это после возвращения к Любаве и хочется
надеяться, что эта истина будет также обнаружена всеми, кто ищет
счастье в их собственных жизнях.
1) “Sadko” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadko
2) Movie and legend “ Sadko”

Thursday, September 6, 2012

The Possibility of True Love

   That perfect someone, your soul mate. The one you have dreamed of all your life. Is it utter magic? Is this the stuff of which dreams are made? Or is it all a myth, a cruel joke being played on us by the Hollywood marketing machine and sappy romance novels?
  
   Robert Epstein, editor of Psychology Today, recently caused quite a stir when he set out to vex the myth of romantic love. His goal is to enter into an agreement with someone for six months, during which time they put themselves through "various exercises . . . the goal being to fall deeply in love by the end of the contract period.

   "We teach our children, and especially our little girls that a knight in a shining sports car is going to drive up one day, awaken perfect passion with a magical kiss, and then drive the blessed couple down the road to Happily Ever After, a special place where no one ever changes," says Epstein. "Hollywood tells us that ‘the One’ is out there for everyone, so no one is willing to settle for Mr. or Ms. Two-Thirds. We want our relationships to be like our antidepressants -- perfect and effortless."

   The evidence backs his statement. According to Psychology Today, over 60 percent of world's marriages are arranged. These marriages have far lower divorce rates, and the couples often find themselves falling in love. In contrast, "romantic" marriages have a 57 percent failure rate, with even less promising statistics for second marriages.1

   This topic was also dealt with in The Kreutzer Sonata by Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) which opens as a third-person narrative by an anonymous gentleman making his way across Russia by train. When the conversation among the passengers turns to the subjects of sex, love, and marriage, a lawyer claims that many couples live long, content married lives. However, Pozdnyshev, another passenger, violently contradicts his statement and announces that he has murdered his wife in a jealous rage, a crime of which a jury had acquitted him. Citing that the deterioration of their marriage began on their honeymoon when they first began a sexual relationship, Pozdnyshev reveals himself as a man with an insane sexual obsession—he links sex with guilt, regards it as a 'fall' from an ideal purity, and describes sexual intercourse as a perverted thing. He tries to persuade his captive audience that all marriages are obscene shams, and that most cases of adultery are occasioned by music, the infamous aphrodisiac. This latter idea explains the title of the story, which is also a musical composition by Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827). Pozdnyshev explains the circumstances that led to his tragedy: after marrying a pretty woman who bore him children, he came to hate, but lust for his wife. One day a musician named Trukachevsky, accepting Pozdnyzhev's invitation to visit their house, accompanied Pozdnyshev's wife on the violin while she played the piano. Convinced that the pair were having an affair,

    Pozdnyshev went into the country to attend the meeting of the local council, often recalling the look on their faces as they played the "Kreutzer Sonata." He returned home early, thinking that he would find the lovers in bed and consequently kill them; instead he found them sitting in the drawing room after they had played some music. Enraged nevertheless, Pozdnyshev killed his wife after Trukachevsky had escaped.2

    The idea of arranged marriages, which was one of the topics discussed on this train ride, is completely foreign to most people in the Western world; however, it is quite common to many cultures throughout the world and according to Robert Epstein it has a very high success rate.  While I am not necessarily advocating the idea of marriage, I do not believe that the “fairy tale” image of marriage is entirely accurate either. 

    It is important to keep in mind that one of the major influences impacting this novella was Lev Tolstoy’s religious belief which advocated celibacy rather than marriage as being virtuous.  In an essay entitled “The Lesson of The Kreutzer Sonata”, Tolstoy explains his view of the subject matter. Regarding carnal love and a spiritual, Christian life, he points out that not Christ, but the Church (which he despised and which in turn excommunicated him) instituted marriage. "The Christian's ideal is love of God and his neighbor, self-renunciation in order to serve God and his neighbor; carnal love – marriage – means serving oneself, and therefore is, in any case, a hindrance in the service of God and men".3

   When Tolstoy wrote this novella, he had been married for many years and had several children.  How did his wife, Sophia Andreyevna, feel about it?  "You are harassing and killing yourself," she wrote him on April 19, 1889, at Yasnaya Polyana (Tolstoy’s estate). "I...have been thinking: he does not eat meat, nor smoke, he works beyond his strength, his brain is not nourished, hence the drowsiness and weakness. How stupid vegetarianism is....Kill life in yourself, kill all impulses of the flesh, all its needs -- why not kill yourself altogether? After all you are committing yourself to *slow* death, what's the difference?"4  

    What is meant by true love?  If we mean that a person must surrender their own identity and simply serve the needs of their husband or wife in order to make sure that he or she is always happy, I am not sure that this is true love. People are constantly changing and evolving, so it is unrealistic to expect that someone can simply give up their identity and individuality in order to serve someone else.  I believe this is one of the problems that Anna Karenina experienced in her marriage and this led to her relationship with Count Vronsky.

    However, if we mean that two people work together as a team and continue to grow together instead of growing apart, I believe that true love is possible.  One of the challenges that many people face is the “fairy tale” understanding of relationships where everyone always lives happily ever after.  One of the most famous lines from the movie, “Love Story” was “love means never having to say you’re sorry.”  There are very few people for whom this would be understood as one of the definitions of love. 

    While everyone may not experience true love in their lives, does this mean that true love is not possible?  The Kreutzer Sonata would not be ideal reading for someone who is a hopeless romantic, but the issues which Tolstoy deals with in this novella have been addressed by countless people throughout the centuries. 

                                                     End Notes

1)     GinaMarie Jerome “Is True Love a Myth?” http://www.thirdage.com/relationships-love/is-true-love-a-myth (posted 7/11/2008, accessed 9/5/2012)

2)     Lev Tolstoy, “The Kreutzer Sonata” http://www.enotes.com/kreutzer-sonata-criticism/kreutzer-sonata-leo-tolstoy (accessed 9/5/2012)

3)     Lev Tolstoy “The Lesson of the Kreutzer Sonata” http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/kreutzer-sonata/29/ (accessed 9/5/2012)

4)     Aleksandra Tolstoya “Tolstoy: A Life of My Father” http://great-authors.albertarose.org/leo_tolstoy/ATolstaya.htm (accessed 9/5/2012)