17 votes

Rand Paul warns eugenics on horizon unless conservatives stand up against abortion rights

LYNCHBERG, Va. — Tea party hero Rand Paul warned scientific advancements could lead to eugenics during a Monday visit at Liberty University, looking to boost the political fortunes of fellow Republican Ken Cuccinelli’s bid for governor.

During a visit to the Christian school founded by Jerry Falwell, Paul looked to energize conservative supporters by warning that people who are short, overweight or less intelligent could be eliminated through abortion. With one week remaining, Cuccinelli is hoping the joint appearance with the U.S. senator from Kentucky will encourage the far-right flank of his party to abandon third-party libertarian spoiler Robert Sarvis.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/rand-paul-warns-eugenics...

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I find it interesting that

I find it interesting that Rand seems to speak more publicly about abortion than the Ron ever did. It's interesting considering he is trying to appeal to a broader base.

Times they are a changing

http://www.gallup.com/poll/154838/pro-choice-americans-recor...

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

I see nothing wrong with the speech;

Rand was/IS correct to warn about the Ethical Dangers of "Designer Babies," as relayed @ recent Liberty University Convocation

Rand Paul on Eugenics, VA 10-28-13

http://youtu.be/7sJUesdi7rc
americanbridge21st
Published on Oct 28, 2013
Rand Paul at Liberty University Convocation
Lynchburg VA, 10-28-2013

NOTE: the only video of it I could find on YT was posted by an a-hole rabid commie statist fascist 'Progressive' apologist, but be that as it may, here it is.

The 'Ethics' of genetics tech/innovation usage in determining who gets to live, die, or improve, aka "designer babies," (H/T: SlugNuts) aka. eugenics, especially one determined by a centralized state's mechanisms determining such (aka. oBUSHmaScare), has been debated and resisted from its very founding days, and still to this day.

But, if you needed any more evidence that SOME among the white-robed cultists are literally sociopathic, look no further than the following (NOTE: this is from a group of Oxford linked self-described 'ethicists'!!!):

OMG: Psychotic Aussie "Ethicists," Yes, EthicistS argue FOR Killing Fetuses AND Healthy Infants!

***********************

http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-1...

After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?

Alberto Giubilini1,2,
Francesca Minerva3,4

1Department of Philosophy, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
2Centre for Human Bioethics, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
3Centre for Applied Philosophy and Public Ethics, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
4Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, Oxford University, Oxford, UK

Correspondence to Dr Francesca Minerva, CAPPE, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC 3010, Australia; francesca.minerva@unimelb.edu.au

Contributors AG and FM contributed equally to the manuscript.

Received 25 November 2011
Revised 26 January 2012
Accepted 27 January 2012
Published Online First 23 February 2012

Abstract

Abortion is largely accepted even for reasons that do not have anything to do with the fetus' health. By showing that (1) both fetuses and newborns do not have the same moral status as actual persons, (2) the fact that both are potential persons is morally irrelevant and (3) adoption is not always in the best interest of actual people, the authors argue that what we call ‘after-birth abortion’ (killing a newborn) should be permissible in all the cases where abortion is, including cases where the newborn is not disabled.

***********************

Killing babies no different from abortion, experts say
Parents should be allowed to have their newborn babies killed because they are “morally irrelevant” and ending their lives is no different to abortion, a group of medical ethicists linked to Oxford University has argued.


New arrival: but if his parents earn more than £60,000 each he will lose his Child Benefit from January Photo: Alamy

By Stephen Adams, Medical Correspondent
1:38PM GMT 29 Feb 2012

The article, published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, says newborn babies are not “actual persons” and do not have a “moral right to life”. The academics also argue that parents should be able to have their baby killed if it turns out to be disabled when it is born.

The journal’s editor, Prof Julian Savulescu, director of the Oxford Uehiro Centre for Practical Ethics, said the article's authors had received death threats since publishing the article. He said those who made abusive and threatening posts about the study were “fanatics opposed to the very values of a liberal society”.

The article, entitled “After-birth abortion: Why should the baby live?”, was written by two of Prof Savulescu’s former associates, Alberto Giubilini and Francesca Minerva.

H/T: JDawson

***************************************************************

The fact that Rand is merely citing reality, and using a film, GATTACA, as a visual aid for the modern dumb-ed down sheeple, and the likes of MADCOW are feigning indignant, and biitching and whining about him reading off Wiki description of the film's plot as "plagiarizing," is pretty propagandistically, telling:

Where'd you get your speech,Rand?

http://youtu.be/bV0TXNpFJFg
News
Published on Oct 29, 2013

'Cause you know, obviously, well, pfft, didn't ya know? If you read off the back of its BluRay packaging's description box or the same info given by the film co, recited in Wiki, then you tell someone else about the film's plot as described by the producers themselves, it's "plagiarizing"... you know: just like writing a novel about it and calling it your own, yay! Didn't ya know?

Is this how seriously dumb-ed down MADCOW's 200 member audience is?

Are all 'liberals' this moronic, these days?

I 'get' that MADCOW's official job description is to be the GE warWHORE propagandist, but WTF is the rest of 'liberals' excuse?

Are her viewers so moronic, that they actually think that this is a 'controversial' view, when geneticists and 'ethicists' and the citizenry constantly talk about this very issue?


Designing Life: Should Babies Be Genetically Engineered?

Wynne Parry, LiveScience Contributor
February 18, 2013 12:22pm ET


Do you think parents should have the option to genetically modify their unborn children?

NEW YORK — The increasing power and accessibility of genetic technology may one day give parents the option of modifying their unborn children, in order to spare offspring from disease or, conceivably, make them tall, well muscled, intelligent or otherwise blessed with desirable traits.

Would this change mean empowering parents to give their children the best start possible? Or would it mean designer babies who could face unforeseen genetic problems? Experts debated on Wednesday evening (Feb. 13) whether prenatal engineering should be banned in the United States.

Humans have already genetically modified animals and crops, said Sheldon Krimsky, a philosopher at Tufts University, who argued in favor of a ban on the same for human babies. "But in the hundreds of thousands of trails that failed, we simply discarded the results of the unwanted crop or animal."

H/T: SlugNuts

***************************************************************

All Rand was saying is that as a scientist himself while he is NOT against the science of genetics, that said, he's simply warning that one should seriously think about the consequences of "playing God," and the derivative society that it may result in, should 'designer babies' become as common as a nose job in Beverly Hills.

Big whup.

Another non-'controversy' controversy, by the statist propagandist drama queens.

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

I/we know eugenics firsthand, and I/we could . . .

write a book on it--

(in this case it had nothing to do with abortion)--

it is real; it happens; it has been happening steadily, quietly, secretly for generations--

for a while the PTB tried to make it popular, and then they just inserted themselves into medical schools, etc.--

it's real--

you can laugh all you want--

reason I can't write a book about it--

I'm afraid that it would be too depressing to bring it all back--

not sure I have the 'guts'--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Roe v. Wade: My opinion.



Most view the result of the Roe v. Wade decision as determining a woman has the "right to choose".
I see it as the man, the father; being stripped of any right whatsoever.

As a young man, I consented to an abortion.
35 years later, 24 years married, trying to have a child.
But it never happened.
Sometimes I feel that God will never forgive me.

Exercise Liberty...and life.


America Rising.
The Constitution Stands.

"That the pen is mightier than the sword would be proven false; if I should take my sword and cut off the hand that holds the pen" - American Nomad

thank you for your courage in . . .

speaking up--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

Rand is being Rand, thank goodness.

I've said it before and I'll say it again, this is brilliant on Rand's part for getting the Republican Party nomination should he end up running in 2016. You don't get the nomination without at least some of the Baptist wing of the bible belt and they eat this stuff up.

Granted, I don't like abortion anymore than the average Jerry Falwell drone does so this stuff doesn't phase me (not to mention I get a thrill up my leg when Rachel Maddow gets pissed about something), but I think some of these pro-choice men need to man up a bit if they want a liberty candidate to actually win office.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Whoa.

...Where'd all the haters come from?

Thanks, Rand, for standing up for LIFE!

http://www.lifesitenews.com

"The Yankee is compelled to toil to make the world go around."
-Admiral Raphael Semmes, CSN
http://standrewsnews.org

They've always been here.

Even the Daily Paul has its share of atheistkult morons who think that calling something "science" automatically makes it above question and feminists who think killing babies is sacrosanct.

A lot of people I know said they held their nose voting for Ron Paul on the abortion issue, in my case that is what I did when I voted for Gary Johnson.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

Progressive take on Rand

"Not The Onion: Rand Paul’s Appallingly Ridiculous Claim about Science and Abortion"
http://www.forwardprogressives.com/not-the-onion-rand-pauls-...

This is sort of a scatter brained article. It suggests that Rand is against science, or the science behind abortion, because it will lead to eugenics.

Rachel Maddow busting rands balls for going full retard

http://video.msnbc.msn.com/rachel-maddow/53400653

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

If you're sourcing Rachel Maddow...

You may as well be in Obama's camp homes. Take that crap to some place that's interested.

“My attitude toward progress has passed from antagonism to boredom. I have long ceased to argue with people who prefer Thursday to Wednesday because it is Thursday.” - G.K. Chesterton

he did not just say that, did he?

no one in their right mind is suggesting the states bring back eugenics programs.

lol, rand really got this one backwards but he was talking to a backwards crowd so i'll give him a pass and a penalty flag on this one.

the real threat is the anti-choice crowd using the state to chain women up, force medicate them and lock them in cages to protect them from themselves.
http://www.dailypaul.com/303497/pregnant-woman-detained-for-...

Official Daily Paul BTC address: 16oZXSGAcDrSbZeBnSu84w5UWwbLtZsBms
My ฿itcoin: 17khsA7MvBJAGAPkhrFJdQZPYKgxAeXkBY
http://www.dailypaul.com/303151/bitcoin-has-gone-on-an-insan...

Don't be naive

Rand is a doctor remember. He understands science but he also knows that it has its place and is not the only aspect of viewing the world we live in. When a society lives as if science is the only determining factor its a slippery slope.
http://www.livescience.com/27206-genetic-engineering-babies-...

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

absolutely concur; and dang it, ya prompted me to do a whole

separate thread!

.o)

Rand was/IS correct to warn about the Ethical Dangers of "Designer Babies," as relayed @ recent Liberty University Convocation

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

Liberty aviation on cutting edge of drone aircraft training

Last year, the university approved the School of Aeronautics to begin training students in the use of Unmanned Aviation Vehicles (UAVs), popularly referred to as drones in their military application.

“Future aviation is going to include drones. There are so many potential applications where drones can be used,” said retired Air Force Brig. Gen. Dave Young, who serves as dean of the Liberty University School of Aeronautics.

http://www.liberty.edu/libertyjournal/?PID=24995&MID=56747

More evidence of how men, through the medical industry want to

More evidence of how men, through the medical industry, want to play god. There is a process of "natural selection" where people live and die generally according to heredity and life's choices. But through "advancements" by the medical industry they play god with who lives and dies.

They try to keep old people alive past their time and deny babies a chance at living in the first place. They try to take away the cause and effect of life which leads to selfishness and degeneration.

Eliminate GOD because we can be our own god. We can decide who lives and dies apart from the natural cause and effect of life itself.

And people still wonder how we have gotten to the sad shape we are in now.

Will you sign a pledge that when you are old and past your prime

you will just go on your way without medical care? When your chest starts to scream with pain, will you stay away from the phone and go as GOD has ordained? What should the cutoff age be? When will you be past your prime? 60? 70? 80? Please enlighten us.

“With laws shall our land be built up, but with lawlessness laid waste.”
-Njal Thorgeirsson

wait a minute--

how many old people do you know who are suffering from the 'help' they've gotten (medical)?

I know quite a few; the guy up above knows what he is talking about.

It's a personal choice as to whether someone calls an ambulance when he/she is having a heart attack--

some do; some don't--

but that is not the point here.

I know walking medical disasters who wish they had been allowed to 'go home' instead of having their insurance pay for several doctors to go to Europe with their wives--

it's a real phenomenon, keeping people alive to their hurt--

I'm not talking about euthanasia; that is a different thing; SOMETIMES it is cruel to paste people together and prolong their pain--

just for a few extra dollars, and it happens all the time--

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

I will

As soon as become a burden to my family and unable to hunt anymore I will do what needs to be done. I fear not my responsibilities. This is the honorable and unselfish way to do it.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

thinking...

I took care of my younger sister and both my parents in ways that took my time, my energy and sometimes my spirit.. it was easily the most enriching experience of my life. My boy from the time he was 8 to 16 was often there with me and for me and I believe he was taught caring and empathy and concern for others in ways that are too often not seen in today's family. There is something to be learned from the lore and history of each of us and old days are a great time to pass that on to young days.

If I had to do it all over again I would in a heartbeat~

"you're not heavy.. you're my brother"

Garnet
Daughter of 1776 American Revolutionists

It's spelled Lynchburg

I know I lived there for 8 years.

Good for Rand. He understands that when the government has the power to take life it is not a good thing.

"Once you become knowledgeable, you have an obligation to do something about it."- Ron Paul

jaseed's picture

Thanks, Rand

...for standing up for life, like your father has done!

"My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them".
Senator Barry Goldwater, Senator Rand Paul
and others.

“The God who gave us life, gave us liberty at the same time: the hand of force may destroy, but cannot disjoin them.”

– Thomas Jefferson

Ut OH!!

Don't say that too loud, a lot of the A-holes on here call the Baby a "Fetus" until the birth .. I guess makes them feel better about abortion since you aren't killing a baby

nothing

like killing those babies that don't have perfect traits.

How long before we get to use eugenics to rid society of

politicians and most police? ;-0

"It is difficult to free fools from the chains they revere".
--Voltaire

It's hard not to be a menace to society when half the population is happy on their knees. - unknown