Obama-Appointed Judge Affirms Using Abortion for Eugenic Purposes


On Friday, a federal judge in Indiana ruled in favor of using abortion for eugenic purposes. The decision permanently blocks a law which banned abortions on account of Down syndrome or other genetic abnormalities, race, gender, or ancestry from being enforced.

District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt, an Obama appointee, sided with Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky by striking down three provisions of HEA 1337, a bill signed into law by then-Governor Mike Pence. The provisions had previously been temporarily blocked by a preliminary order passed back in June 2016, the day before the law was set to take effect. This new ruling permanently blocks enforcement of the provisions:

The challenged anti-discrimination provisions directly contravene well-established law that precludes a state from prohibiting a woman from electing to terminate a pregnancy prior to fetal viability.

Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky’s president and CEO, Christie Gillespie, applauded the decision saying, “There is no medical basis for these restrictions. This is just another example of politicians coming between physicians and patients.”

On Monday, Indiana Right to Life released a statement in response to the decision urging Attorney General Curtis Hill to appeal:

No one should be targeted for abortion solely because of their sex, race, national origin or a potential disability like Down syndrome. Judge Pratt’s ruling is sadly predictable, based on her previous track record. We urge Attorney General Curtis Hill to appeal.

Hill assured them that he does plan to appeal the ruling to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago and expressed deep disappointment with Judge Pratt’s decision:

By declaring unconstitutional a state law that would bar abortions based solely on race, sex or disability such as Down syndrome, a federal judge has cleared the path for genetic discrimination that once seemed like science fiction. This state has a compelling interest in protecting the dignity of the unborn and in ensuring they are not selected for termination simply because they lack preferred physical characteristics.

Putting aside the legal and constitutional aspects of the ruling, Judge Pratt did get one thing right in her 22-page ruling. She acknowledges that there is agreement between both sides on two important points:

The parties are essentially in agreement that a significant number of women have sought, and will continue to seek, an abortion solely because of the diagnosis of a disability or the risk thereof…The parties agree that the number of women who will seek an abortion at least in part out of these concerns will likely increase as testing is more widely available than ever before.

The fact that people are using abortion for eugenic purposes and that Planned Parenthood wants to defend such actions shows just how barbaric our society has become. Abortion advocates are so blinded by the darkness of the culture of death that they either fail to see, or refuse to acknowledge, the equivalence between their less visible, though still as gruesome, eugenic practices and those of notorious eugenicists throughout history. Whether it was Margaret Sanger with her plan to sterilize those with low IQs, Nazi Germany wanting to wipe out all who were not of the Aryan race, or now the desire to have the “perfect child” by aborting any who fall short, the last century has seen its share of victims of eugenics.

Eugenics claims to have a noble goal — the cleansing or purification of the human race in order to create a healthier, stronger, and smarter human being. However, it accomplishes that goal through the most brutal means of weeding out the “unfit” by exterminating millions of innocent people.

With this new decision, abortionists have been given approval to continue discriminating against babies with certain physical traits that their mothers do not like. The exterminations will only increase as scientific advances allow for more and more prenatal testings. How far will we allow eugenics to take us? Today it is gender, race, and potential for disease; tomorrow it may be something as superficial as hair color, predicted height, or eye color. The quest for the perfect human being continues — but only at the expense of countless others who must pay the ultimate price for these “advances.”

Andrea Moury

Andrea Moury is a regular contributor to TheNationalPulse.com.

Get the Real News.

Big Tech keeps banning or shadow-banning us, so we have to keep innovating.

Drop us your e-mail, so they can't keep hiding our investigations from you.

Raheem Kassam

You have successfully subscribed to the newsletter

There was an error while trying to send your request. Please try again.

The National Pulse. will use the information you provide on this form to be in touch with you and to provide updates and marketing.