Does it matter whether a law prohibits an abortionist from killing an unborn baby based on his race, sex, national origin, ancestry, or diagnosis of Down syndrome?
Abortion is just as heinous, regardless of the reason. But pro-lifers want to apply civil rights protections to the unborn.
When Vice President Mike Pence was governor of Indiana, he signed a bill into law that barred abortions based on the previously listed factors. The law also required aborted babies to be cremated or buried and not treated as a waste product.
A lower court overturned the law, and the U.S. Supreme Court took up the case. However, the court on Tuesday upheld only the cremation/burial provision of the law and refused to hear arguments about the civil rights factors.
Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion (34-page PDF – Thomas’s opinion begins p. 13) in the decision. He agreed with the majority but wanted to discuss the potential eugenics aspect of abortion, which is why the Indiana legislature passed such a law (emphasis added):
Given the potential for abortion to become a tool of eugenic manipulation, the Court will soon need to confront the constitutionality of laws like Indiana’s. But because further percolation may assist our review of this issue of first impression, I join the Court in declining to take up the issue now.
This case highlights the fact that abortion is an act rife with the potential for eugenic manipulation. From the beginning, birth control and abortion were promoted as means of effectuating eugenics. Planned Parenthood founder Margaret Sanger was particularly open about the fact that birth control could be used for eugenic purposes. These arguments about the eugenic potential for birth control apply with even greater force to abortion, which can be used to target specific children with unwanted characteristics.”