Justin Barrett and the National Party Jul 18, 2022 21:43:41 GMT
Post by Young Ireland on Jul 18, 2022 21:43:41 GMT
As a result, I asked a number of the leafleters it this was actually NP policy. One waved me away, saying that he did not want to get into a debate, while another referred me to a third individual, who confirmed that the NP were indeed pro-eugenics. When I pressed him on how eugenics is leading to the mass abortion of Down Syndrome babies, and historically to sterlisations of those deemed "unfit", he did say that the party did not support these, which I fully accept. Instead, he said it was about good nutrition and exercise.
This may well be the case, but these practices are called living a healthy lifestyle, and is good regardless of its effects on the "race". Calling it eugenics, which has a much darker history, will only lead to confusion, and gives the impression that the likes of Marie Stopes and Margaret Sanger had the right ideas, but went about it the wrong way.
ADDENDUM: I should also add that when questioned whether or not those not meeting the ideal would be considered "inferior", the NP member said no, of course not.
As an aside, I read Helen Joyce's remarks and there is nothing about eugenics in it. She has deliberately been misconstrued by the rainbow brigade in order to close her down.
Joyce is a very articulate advocate against the idea of men becoming women just because they feel it, and she is against their push to compel us all to validate and celebrate their fantasies.
Joyce is Irish, one of her brothers was captain of Ireland cricket team. She is an atheist, her analysis is very good but she fell in my opinion when she criticised Matt Walsh's recent video 'What is a woman'. She said that it was a good video but marred by the fact that Walsh is a conservative Catholic and therefore a sexist because he has criticised feminism. A pretty big assumption to make and one that doesn't help her logic as she herself (rightly) rails against being misrepresented.
You're right Assisi, having come across her original remarks, she actually said that she wanted to reduce the number of people "transitioning" - which is desirable not just for moral reasons but because multilating one's body in such a manner irreversably is bound to have lifelong consequences. It certainly cannot be considered a defence of eugenics in any shape or form.