You’re talking eugenics? :fryingpan:I
So what? Eugenics is a meaningless buzzword oftentimes. There is nothing that the Liberals of today promote more than racemixing and a disregard for genetic health. You can read the Catholic Encyclopedia's article on eugenics. The Church does not necessarily condemn it. I have read that relevant part of Casti Connubi where it says that people who wish to forbid people, who, otherwise being wholly fit for marriage, on the grounds that they can only produce offspring that are defective based upon their own conjectures, lose sight of the realization that the family is more sacred than the state and that they are being overzealous for the cause of eugenics. However, it should be noted that this was said in 1930, and applied more specifically to public rulers. Also, Pope Pius XI condemned L'action Francaise and abandoned the Cristeros in Mexico. Thus, he is below the threshold of being a particularly great pope. These things do indeed have moral consequences, and must not be dismissed as "eugenics" since this is not an argument. So, if we can be certain beyond a reason of a doubt that there will be a miscarriage or severe impairments, then what is the point? I genuinely want to know. Are there any sophisticated arguments in favor of this?