
I mean this is definitionally eugenics, yes. But eugenics is a complex topic and it permeates our society much more than we often realize. Genetic testing for heritable diseases is also a form of eugenics. So is women choosing to have an abortion when their fetus has a major health problem or developmental disability.
Thats why the topic is so complex, eugenics has many nasty histories, but we still do it. Should we give rid of testing for genetic cancer risk on the basis of “all eugenics bad?” And what is the relationship between helping disabled people and increased medical technology enabling the prevention or curing of some disabilities?
We should of course accept blind and deaf people. But new technologies are enabling treatments that can increasingly prevent, cure, or otherwise treat some forms of blindness and deafness. Humanistically, that is good. But how does it impact the societal accommodation of people who still have it?
in the nation that sterilized people with disabilities, and has a rather intimate relationship with eugenics. mind you, we’re all one work or car accident away from being disabled. people with disabilities will always exist, so make their lives easier. the everyman needs to stfu when it comes to who has a right to exist and who does not