DOWNS SYNDROME ABORTIONS

  LESSONS FROM THE PAST AS TO IMPROPER WAYS TO CONDUCT YOURSELVES TODAY

HOME  |  CASE STUDIES  |  HISTORY  |  HUMAN RIGHTS  |  LAW  |  POLICE   |  POLITICS  |  RIGHTS  |  SHIT CREEK  |  SITE INDEX

LONDON - The Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Reverend Justin Welby, addresses the General Synod at Church House in London

THE TELEGRAPH 10 FEBRUARY 2018

The rate of Down's syndrome abortions in the UK and Europe is akin to Nazi eugenics, the Church of England's General Synod has heard.

The comments were made during a debate about non-invasive pre-natal testing as the Church raised concerns that a rising number of abortions would lead to the condition being wiped out altogether.

Synod members unanimously passed a motion calling for the Government to ensure that "unbiased information" is given to expectant parents who are told their child has Down's Syndrome after taking the blood test, which is being rolled out across the UK and replaces older tests which carried a risk of miscarriage.

The Church raised concerns that women were being put under pressure to abort and urged doctors not to frame such a result as "bad news".

Speaking during the debate, Andrew Gray, a lay member of Synod, said: "We live in a society that claims to value and appreciate those who are different and those who have a disability and yet what we say and do are two different things.

"In countries like Iceland Down's Syndrome has been virtually eliminated," he said. "What we have is a very simple situation. The UK and Europe has begun to practice eugenics, by default, and without intent.

"This is not because of a state-led desire to remove those considered weak or sub-human - we don't live in 1930s Germany, thank god. But while the reasons and the motivations are different, the outcome is the same.

"I refer to 1930s Germany with some caution because the Third Reich has a habit of being drawn into these debates, but quite frankly, with this one, there are some stark comparisons."

Mark Bratton, from the diocese of Coventry, said: "I think we are right to be concerned about the eugenic undertones and hurtful impact of some aspects of the debate."

The Bishop of Carlisle James Newcome, called for parents to be provided with "full information about the support available and the future prospects of those with this condition, with no implied preference for any outcome".

Introducing the motion he said the life expectancy for a child with Down's Syndrome had risen from nine years in 1929 to 60 years today.

"We are concerned that not everyone (and I include medical staff) may be aware of the amazing progress that has been made," he said.

However, he said the debate was not about the ethics of abortion, pointing out that the Church's position on that issue is clearly stated.

He said: "Although the motion today has partly been prompted by some people's concern that the abortion rate for those diagnosed with Down's Syndrome could increase to nearly 100 per cent, the rights and wrongs of abortion itself are not the purpose of our discussion."

The church's official stance on the termination of pregnancies, which has not changed, "combines strong opposition to abortion with a recognition that there can be strictly limited conditions under which it may be morally preferable to any available alternative".

Mr Newcome resisted efforts from some members to introduce clauses calling for pregnancies not to be terminated on the basis of Down's Syndrome, arguing that the move "could be seen as putting pressure on women and even criticising them".

In response to concerns from members about the situation in Iceland and Denmark the Archbishop of Canterbury also said he would speak to his counterparts in the Porvoo Communion of northern European churches about the high rate of abortion in those countries for foetuses thought to have the condition.

Speaking earlier in the week the actress Sally Phillips, who has a son with Down's Syndrome, said women were "over and over told by implication but also overtly that they will not be able to cope with a Down's Syndrome baby".

She told a small group of Synod members that a pregnant friend had been "rung nine times during her pregnancy to be offered and offered and offered a termination in case she changed her mind".

The group also heard from Heidi Crowter, 22, who has Down's Syndrome, and who urged members to pass the motion.

By Olivia Rudgard, Social and Religious Affairs Correspondent 

BUCHENWALD - concentration camp (German: Konzentrationslager (KZ) Buchenwald, in English: beech forest) was a German Nazi concentration camp established on Ettersberg hill near Weimar, Germany, in July 1937, one of the first and the largest of the concentration camps on German soil, following Dachau's opening just over four years earlier. Today the remains of Buchenwald serve as a memorial and permanent exhibition and museum.

LINKS & REFERENCE

OTHER UK EUGENICS PROGRAMMES

Eugenics programmes did not stop with the Nazis. In the United Kingdom subtle eugenic agendas are pursued by police and councils, and even the state has sanctioned human rights violations for some kinds of crimes, about which David Blunkett was a party, in shifting the burden of proof in sex cases, without altering the scale of fees in relation to the extra cost of defending such cases, and removing the duty to warn a Jury that it is dangerous to convict a person on the unsupported evidence of a man or women claiming that they had been abused, raped or otherwise molested.

Quite obviously, if there is no supporting physical evidence to support rape, such as tears or lacerations in the vagina or anus, but such evidence is no longer needed because of the abrogation of the warning that a Judge gives in every other criminal case, a sex trial becomes more of a witch hunt than an actual trial that one might describe as fair in Article 6 terms.

Britain is therefore guilty of Article 1 and Article 6 crimes against the person, also invoking Article 17, in that the Single Judge system allows the State to filer out cases that they do not want to receive a hearing, so condoning discrimination that is an Article 14 violation. Indeed, it appears from the evidence that Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II honours some of those in the judicial system for their services in this regard. The Queen was of course a Grand Patron of the Royal Masonic Benevolent Institution as was His Royal Highness the Duke of Kent, the Grand President of The New Masonic Samaritan Fund.

One Judge that has come to our attention on this score is Sir Christopher Holland ........

The British system is thus a minefield of eugenic activity, and they can get away with it by not including Articles 1 or 13 in the domestic Human Rights Act 1998 and where the European Court of Human Rights are also a law unto themselves, not explaining decisions to applicants, where in reality they are simply sifting out cases to relieve their workload - in similar fashion to the United Kingdom with the army of tame Single Judges.

HISTORY OF EUGENICS - In 1907, the eugenics Education Society was founded in Britain to campaign for sterilisation and marriage restrictions for the weak to prevent the degeneration of Britain's population. 

In 1931, Labour MP Archibald Church proposed a bill for the compulsory sterilisation of certain categories of 'mental patient' in Parliament. 

Meanwhile from 1907 in the United States, men, women and children who were deemed 'insane, idiotic, imbecile, feebleminded or epileptic' were forcibly sterilised, often without being informed of what was being done to them.

By 1938, 33 American states permitted the forced sterilisation of women with learning disabilities and 29 American states had passed compulsory sterilisation laws covering people who were thought to have genetic conditions.

During WWII Nazi Germany took Eugencis to the next level with mass murder in gas chambers. All legislation was eventually repealed in the 1940s.

In 1982 Wealden tipped their hand in a programme to disadvantage a number of targeted individuals in their District that this Council thought did not fit in with their preferences. In one case lasting more than 30 years they systematically targeted one individual, not only violating Articles 8, 14 and 17, but also Article 3 where they knew such a level of repeated attacks would be bound to cause tremendous stresses that most ordinary people could not withstand.

A MODERN FORM OF EUGENICS

In the UK today Article 14 is bandied about as though being complied with by both Conservative and Labour parties, but in fact most agencies like Wealden District Council and Sussex Police, to name just two, are allowed to cleanse their districts of citizens they deem as undesirable. We report on cases where this Council was geared up to preventing certain individuals from succeeding in raising a family - so cutting them out of the succession loop as certainly as if they had been gelded.

This is achieved by simply making life intolerable for people they are targeting, favoring one neighbour over another when it comes to property ownership and use. In the worst case we know of they actually tried to empty a building of washing and toilet facilities, leaving the occupants to defecate in hedges and the like knowing that such abuses of their position of trust was illegal. But, they did it anyway, in the process attempting to bankrupt the individual and fabricating evidence seeking to inflict more harm, eliciting help of the Sussex Police, in a cover up of their wrong doing the finally working with Sussex Police to discredit their victim with a false conviction based on evidence that they not only knew was wrong, but crafted to deceive a Jury to obtain a prison sentence that they hoped would silence the activist. They did this not once but twice, but on the second occasion a Jury could see through the deception.

The corruption did not stop there with the Criminal Cases Review Commission deciding that in this case they were entitled to take a view. What they meant was they were condoning Article 14 discrimination, where in near identical circumstances the CCRC were happy to refer two other cases based on medical misinformation, to the Appeal Court - but not in this case, where apparently the deciding factor is/was that a relation to the so-called victim was a mason.

In this case three senior High Court Judges were involved ............

THE GESTAPO ARE ALIVE AND WELL IN EVERY COUNCIL PLANNING DEPARTMENT

WHO WE WERE FIGHTING AGAINST FROM 1939 TO 1945

WEALDEN'S OFFICERS FROM 1983 TO 2018

Abbott Trevor - Alcock Charmain - Ditto - Arnold Chris (Christine) - Barakchizadeh Lesley - Paul Barker - Bending Christopher

Black Julian - Boakes Beverley - Bradshaw Clifford - Brigginshaw Marina - Brown Ashley - Coffey Patrick - Douglas Sheelagh

Dowsett Timothy - Flemming Mike - Forder Ralph - Garrett Martyn - Goodwin Daniel - Henham J - Holness Derek

Hoy Thomas - Johnson Geoff - Kavanagh Geoff - Kay Ian - Kay I. M. - Barbara Kingsford - Lant Charles - Mercer Richard

Mileman Niall - Moon Craig - Moss Douglas, J. -  Nuttall Christine - Pettigrew Rex - Phillips David - Scarpa Victorio - Scott Trevor

Kevin Stewart - Wakeford Michael. - Whibley David - White, George - Williams Kelvin - Wilson Kenneth - White Steve

LINKS & REFERENCE

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/02/10/rate-downs-syndrome-abortions-uk-europe-akin-nazi-eugenics-church/

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-4631996/Haunting-photographs-reveal-dark-story-eugenics.html
https://www.britannica.com/science/eugenics-genetics
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/eugenics
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2016/04/the-return-of-eugenics/

This site is free of © Copyright except where specifically stated 1997 - 2021.  Any person may download, use and quote any reference or any link, and is guaranteed such right to freedom of information and speech under the Human Rights and Freedom of Information Acts.  However, be aware that we cannot be held liable for the accuracy of the information provided.  All users should therefore research matters for themselves and seek their own legal advice and this information is provided simply by way of a guide.  Horse Sanctuary Trust UK   All trademarks herby acknowledged.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.  FAIR USE NOTICE