Last night, Evita Duffy posed a crucial question to viewers of Tucker Carlson Tonight:
“We need to decide as a culture, are we going to be [people who] discriminate against others based on their immutable qualities? Or are we going to be a culture of life and of authentic tolerance?”
Evita’s question comes in response to Sarah Zhang’s article in The Atlantic, in which Zhang discusses the rising trend in Denmark to abort Down Syndrome (DS) pregnancies. Due to this trend, over 95 percent of babies with DS are aborted in Denmark.
Throughout Zhang’s article, she encourages no-judgement. According to Zhang, the decision of whether or not to abort a DS pregnancy is difficult—and there’s purportedly no clear moral answer.
As the Managing Editor of the Thinker, an intern at The Federalist, and the older sister of a young sibling with DS, Duffy vocally condemns this normalization of eugenics. She and her family adore the youngest member of their family: “[Valentina is] so sweet. She’s adorable. She loves music…She’s the favorite of our family.”
In a recent article for The Federalist, Duffy wrote that “killing a disabled child is…wrong. There is no ‘humanity’ in killing a child. There is no ‘humanity’ in targeting the weak. There is no ‘humanity’ in eugenics.” However, as Duffy highlighted on Tucker, the left continues to embrace selective outrage on this issue. While the left became infuriated by the mere smirk of a Covington Catholic student (who has since been redeemed by legal settlements), Duffy’s rhetoric exposes that the rise of eugenics somehow obtains tacit approval from the left.
Why is this the case? According to Duffy, many individuals just don’t want to say anything negative about abortion. And there is also an economic incentive to abort DS pregnancies—especially for a nation like Denmark, which possesses universal healthcare. However, Duffy argues that this is not a morally justifiable excuse:
“More people with disabilities, it causes strains on the state. And that’s the original [goal of] eugenics in Nazi Germany. [The genocide of people with disabilities] didn’t end with World War II. It’s alive and well today.”
Watch Duffy’s full interview on Tucker, below.
Thank you to both Audrey and Evita for this very important story! And thank you for calling out the absolute lunacy of Sarah Zhang’s assertion that “there’s purportedly no clear moral answer” to the decision to abort a DS pregnancy! We need more brave and compassionate people like you to shine the light on the horrific evil of modern-day eugenics. Thank you for standing bravely in support of those who can’t protect themselves! I wish you the very best!
Thank you Audrey & Miss Duffy for your courageous writing.
Does the Chicago Thinker produce a hard copy magazine or is it only a blog?
I think there should be a hard copy Chicago Thinker magazine – hard copy magazines and books have more influence and staying power than blogs or tweets. Students and just Hyde Park residents can read, re-read a magazine and share their favorite articles with others. The internet was great when it first came out – it seemed to be breaking the terrible mainstream media Lib Leftist monopoly of television and newspapers of record (New York Times WaPost). But now the tech monopolists are dramatically cutting down on free speech and well, Conservatives trying to make a tweet or a blog that will change the course of American politics and culture – it’s just not happening.
I’m interested in (financially) supporting a hard copy Chicago Thinker magazine.
U of Chicago alumnus
Hyde Park born and raised, returned, stuck for life in HP
Television has Fox News, and newspapers of record also include the Wall Street Journal and (arguably) Chicago Tribune. Yes, there are more liberal-leaning “mainstream” news outlets than conservative, but there’s hardly a monopoly. Leftists would also laugh at your referring to the New York Times or Washington Post as “leftist” papers.
I eagerly await the imminent Republican push to provide for comprehensive resources for low- and middle-income families raising kids with special needs, and their commitment to end all forms of discrimination based on immutable characteristics – including sexual orientation, gender identity, and national origin. I suppose this is a step up from complaining about the censorship of conservatives…
The answer is no. Why isn’t the comment field marked with an asterisk if it’s required?? For a paper called the Thinker y’all gotta think more about the design of your website
There’s a 1000-character limit on these comments but I’m curious as to the limit on names. Also it’s my right to critique web design in the comments of a website so please don’t remove this
Ok so the answer is 245, apparently. Why 245? That’s a weird number to end on.
I for one think what’s inhumane is that even a family as contemptible as the Campos-Duffys should be encouraged to carry a worthless sack of meat to term, and then be forced to raise it as an equal to their other normal children.
Yikes dude that’s pretty fucked up. So fucked up in fact that I seriously doubt that this comment is a good-faith argument in support of abortion rights and instead a way to paint your political rivals as heartless monsters who don’t care about children by pretending to be one of them, but hey, that’s just my own impression. FWIW I’m pro-choice and wholly disavow this comment.