The Supreme Court recently ruled on an Indiana abortion law. The Court let stand a lower court decision that a ban on abortions motivated by fetal deformity or sex selection was unconstitutional. However, the court declared a law requiring the burial of aborted remains constitutional.
The short, per curiam, opinion was followed by a longer, and rather bizarre, concurring opinion by Justice Thomas. In it, Thomas argued laws against abortion were justified by the state’s interest in preventing eugenics. He rambled on about how the threat of eugenics was real, and historically tied to abortion, a claim disputed by many historians.
Included within this disjointed rambling was the following statement by Justice Thomas, read it carefully:
“From the beginning, birth control and abortion were promoted as means of effectuating eugenics.”
Thomas equated birth control and abortion. He further stated both were a means of effectuating eugenics in the context of arguing that the state has a legitimate interest in stopping things that could be used to effectuate genetics.
The argument advanced by Supreme Court Justice Thomas should frighten women everywhere. Per this argument state bans on birth control are as justifiable as state bans on abortion because both birth control and abortion supposedly advance eugenics. Birth control pills, and even condoms, are threatened by this line of thinking.