c



 

 

 
 
 



Eugenics, Positive or Negative?

The word eugenics was made by Sir Francis Galton. Sir Francis Galton was focused on

the positive side of eugenics. As to show the effects of positive eugenics he encouraged capable

and healthy people with above average intelligence to have children. Some followers of Galton

combined his work with Gregory Mendel¶s research in an attempt to explain the generational

passing of human traits. Germany and America had problems with the negative side of eugenics.

The negative side of eugenics was that poor in their streets kept having children of their

own, causing the population of the poor to grow rapidly. The center of eugenics in America was

the Eugenics Records Office (ERO) at Cold Spring Harbor, New York. Their view of eugenics

was that the strongest and smartest reproduce, while the smallest and weakest do not. Eugenics

eventually came up with human pedigree charts, as to prove that families can pass on genetic

traits from generation to generation. These charts could also prove that feeblemindedness was a

possible trait to be passed on as well, causing some families to become criminals.

Eugenics (if split into its root words) means good genes. Eugenics can improve our

society, not by making better races, but by using it to help keep diseases from crippling us.

Groups like the Nazis wanted to use Eugenics for evil; they killed those they thought inferior to

their race. Eugenics isn¶t bad; it can only be used in a bad way. I believe that we should draw a

line between helping prevent illness and enhancing ourselves.

c
 
 

 

 
 
 


Phillip Jenkins says ³Now, eugenic opinion comes in many shades and only extremists

used the language of extermination and µlethal chambers.¶ Most advocates were content to

eliminate the bad seed through sterilization, forced or voluntary.´(Why churches supported

eugenics in the early 1900s) In the early 1900¶s some world leaders were for eugenics. Some

even thought of it as an answer to poverty. They thought of forcing the poor to be sterilized so

they couldn¶t reproduce and encourage the rich to have more children.

Although many well known religious leaders tried pleading with their religious followers

to accept eugenic teachings, some of them still didn¶t approve. The religious leaders also grafted

a eugenic message onto their efforts at church based charity, and adopted eugenic solutions to

social problems in their communities. Jenkins states in his paper ³In 1912, Dean Walter Taylor

Sumner of Chicago¶s Episcopal Cathedral demanded that any couple wishing to marry in church

show a certificate of health from a doctor. Sumner was no isolated crank. Other mainline clergy

issued similar decrees.´(Why churches supported eugenics in the early 1900s)

Eugenics wasn¶t very popular with religions, some saw it as an act against God. Even

though their religious leaders tried to convince them it wasn¶t and that it was a part of the

modern world. They stuck to the old beliefs; ever since America started progressing

scientifically, religions have had to change to accommodate the new beliefs. Traditionalists are

typically against eugenics. Christine Rosen shows that some promotions for eugenics took it a bit

too far, ³Take, for example, the Reverend Washington Gladden, a leader in the ³Social Gospel´

movement, who asserted in 1926 that Christianity ³must be a religion less concerned about

getting men to heaven than about fitting them for their proper work on earth.´(The role of

religion in the rise of eugenics)

c
 
 

 

 
 
 


There were not a lot of these instances but there were enough for it to stand out. Some of

the leaders of the eugenics movement stayed away from anything religious, however, the

American Eugenics society knew it could use religion to get to millions of average Americans.

The worst instance of religious extremists is when Christine Rosen says ³Many gospel adherents

viewed eugenics as God¶s plan to reconcile the truths of science with the bible. Towards this end,

bible verses were interpreted and found to contain what had theretofore been secret eugenic

messages. Thus, in one minister¶s sermon, Noah¶s flood was God¶s own eugenics policy for

eliminating a human race that had degraded and become inferior«´ (The role of religion in the

rise of eugenics)

As being a previous Christian, I believe this is a misinterpretation. In the bible it

specifically says god sent that flood for a different reason than because of eugenics. God sent

that flood because everyone on the earth had turned their backs on him except Noah. That¶s why

he lived, some could argue his genes were the cause of his loyalty but I doubt it. I believe that

science and religion should remain separated.

Like Mrs. Rosen stated earlier, the American Eugenics Society wanted to get to the

average American and they did. Unfortunately no lines were drawn, so the religious leaders just

kept going. If not for our government¶s laws I¶m sure it could¶ve escalated to the point where we

would¶ve become the Nazi¶s. Grace Chen states ³When given the opportunity, man has always

strived to achieve excellence and improvement. We built punch card computers, and then we

built microprocessors. We made gasoline-powered vehicles, and then built electricity-powered

engines.
c
 
 

 

 
 
 


Even in ourselves ± our bodies or physical makeup ± we try to enhance whatever we

have. Never satisfied, we buy cosmetics, exercise equipment, dietary pills and beautifying

ointments of every assortment.´(Science of eugenics is a dangerous one) Man loves to outdo

himself; we try and make ourselves better every day. We ignore whether this causes us to pass

the moral and ethical lines. Sometimes we know and sometimes we don¶t, this is what

determines the good from the bad.

Eugenics has a dark history, it has had its dark moments like when the Nazi¶s took Jewish

prisoners and killed them systematically and its lighter moments like when a woman cures her

firstborn son of two months of a serious sickness by having the doctors use the gene of the

second newborn son curing the two at once. Eugenics is a possible threat of the future, but there

is no doubt that it will be in Americas future, either for curing sicknesses or for enhancing races

for our own gain. We can¶t fight the inevitability of it, but we can decide on how it¶s used.