I'll Bet They Saved a Polar Bear,Though...

French Vegans on trial; Child fed only on breast milk dies of malnutrition.

Some people are just too stupid to be parents. Then again, some people are just too stupid to be government officials. I submit:

"While anxious not to call into question the couple's lifestyle, Anne-Laure Sandretto, the deputy prosecutor, admitted: "The problem with a vitamin B12 deficiency could be linked to the mother's eating habits."

Right, because we should never question or investigate 'lifestyles' that lead to dead infants. That would be, like, all, oppressive, and junk. That vegan lifestyle choice and a dead baby are, like, totally unconnected.

Of course, we also shouldn't call into question the state of mind of two people who seem obsessed with cabbage and clay, even going as far as to use both as medicine, because then we might have to label them as stark, raving lunatics, and have to take their children away and perhaps lock them up in a place with rubber sheets...on the walls. That might ruin their self-esteem,and cost money that could be better spent on making certain the elderly, or prison inmates, have free Viagra and government maid service.

And this is the country that led President Odingbat into a kinetic-military-action-of-choice in Libya?

Here's why I don't understand the legal system, even though this is France you would assume the systems are somewhat similar to ours in the basics:

"Patrick Quenel, lawyer for the father, whose business has gone into liquidation, said the couple were "completely aware of the mistakes they made".

Isn't that tantamount to a confession? A recognition of responsibility or rather, irresponsibility? If so, then why is there a trial which appears as if it's entering it's third year? Oh, and nice touch with that 'business in liquidation' bullshit, councillor -- like that's going to gin up any sympathy when the jury gets shown photos of a malnourished, dead baby?

Some people shouldn't be allowed to be parents. Perhaps one day we'll develop some sort of test administered at at birth that warns us about just who the irresponsible, the stupid, the cruel, the monstrous and the insane are, and then we can spay or neuter 'em before they breed. One can only hope.

OMG,I just sounded like a Progressive Libtard there for a second! That was, in fact, the driving force behind abortion-on-demand and the Lynchburg Experiments!

People We Don't Want Too Many Of...

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg was recently interviewed by one of those thoroughly professional journalism people in regards to the circus that is Sotomayor, when she let slip a very disturbing little gem which will probably be remembered forever. In fact, it might be the only thing ever uttered by Justice Ginsburg which will be remembered at all.

Speaking on Roe v. Wade, Madam Justice told the so-called reporter who asked her about the landmark usurpation of State and Congressional authority by a renegade Court that she was under the impression that the real purpose of Roe was (paraphrasing here) "to control certain populations which we don't want too many of..."

The reporter, probably too shocked by what she'd just heard, failed to ask the logical follow-up question; "What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis?", oh sorry, I mean "Did you have a particular population in mind, Madam Justice"?

I'm only assuming that she (the reporter) was shocked. What's more likely is that her finely-honed journalistic skill set (ripping things off the Internet without confirmation or attribution, making shit up to fit your argument, making false attacks against conservatives, learning where the free coffee and donuts are) was insufficient to cope with such an earth-shattering revelation of what one of America's most powerful judges thinks about the value of human life....especially if it belongs to a person we "don't want too many of."

Since the Justice didn't elaborate, and the reporter was somehow prevented (probably by a brain tumor) from asking for clarification, let me take a stab at filling in the list of people we supposedly don't want, and which Roe was probably intended to "control" according to Madam Justice;

Blacks.
Hispanics.
The Handicapped.
The Mentally Ill.
Criminals.
Christians.
Republicans.
Rich White Heterosexual Patrician Males (specifically).
Men (in general)

For those of you who are not familiar with the Eugenics Movement which was a hallmark of Progressive thinking in this country during the early part of the last century, this is the point.
The Eugenicists held that people, like dogs, cows or racehorses, could be bred to produce superior specimens (what the Nazis would call Ubermenchen, or Supermen) who exhibit what the Eugenicists considered the finest traits of the human race. Things like intelligence, strength, athleticism, artistic sense, according to this theory, could be bred into successive generations of human beings until we were all 'perfect'.

Traits that were undesirable: propensity to disease, deformities, anti-social behavior, ignorance would be 'bred out' of the human race, by the process of sterilizing those who possessed those traits, or in the extreme, killing them. This is Darwinism taken to it's extreme. It resulted in the Lynchburg and Tuskeegee experiments in this country -- where people were forcibly sterilized, given forced abortions, and then 'hospitalized' for many years (some for the remainder of their lives) to keep them from 'polluting' the gene pool -- that's when they weren't actually experimented on by so-called scientists. In Nazi Germany, it led to the creation of special 'baby farms' where children created by the union of the men of the SS and German women willing to breed in service to the state, were raised in government-run orphanages to create the next generation of Aryan Supersoldiers for the Third Reich.

They were programs intended to perfect mankind by either removing the worst genetic material by isolation from the 'breeding stock', or surgical prevention of conception, and by only allowing those deemed best equipped to reproduce. Many of them actually handed out breeding licenses, and in some cases, arrest for a particular crime might entail an automatic sentence of sterilization, or remand to specifically be studied (read; experimented upon) by scientists.

The counterpart (and logical conclusion) to those programs was, unfortunately, the horror of the Nazi concentration and death camps, which aimed to not just annihilate the Jews as the object of Nazi obsession and hatred, but the Jews as a source of DNA which the Nazis believed 'polluted' the superior races of Europe.

Good to know that Justice Ginsburg (who I have to believe probably knows at least one Holocaust survivor) believes that American law is intended to produce genocide; under the guise of 'reproductive rights', according to her, the actual purpose of Roe was deny those same rights to those deemed unworthy by the State, or at least by a future State being run by 'Progressives'.
Nice.

Jonah Goldberg of National Review has a thing or two to say on the subject.

Update: Apparently YesWeCan's new "Science Czar" wrote a book advocating this very shit 40 years ago! Here's the dirt on the despicable John Holder, courtesy of the National Examiner.