Eugenics refers to the science of improving the population of human by breed controlling that leads to the increase of occurrence of desirable characteristics that are heritable. Francis Galton developed the study as a method of improving the human race. This paper is an argumentative essay that discusses whether state-sponsored eugenics is morally obligated or morally prohibited. State-sponsored should be prohibited this is discussed below giving the reasons that contribute largely to its prohibition. Lastly, the article gives an objection on the basis of the argument.
Despite the perfect knowledge and skills of genetics, that the scientist has it is morally prohibited. Back in history of eugenics, it states that in the beginning of the year 1980s the advancement in science under genetics was significant in the field of science this enhanced the knowledge of genetic engineering to advance in wider perspective that has led to the production of genetically modified foods that are visible to the general public ( Mehler, 2015) . It has the meaning that the scientist had perfect knowledge of genetics from time immemorial. In addition to this, the government can fairly and impartially administer eugenics program without the issue of racism be it the case. On the other hand, the program of eugenics aims solely to the human good and not bad or a false theory of human good ( Reilly, 2015) . Despite all these eugenics to some extent should be morally prohibited.
The state should be morally prohibited from ensuring that children have better genes than they would naturally end up with if there were no intervention. The aspect of eugenics fist had the negative effect as follows
Marriage Prohibition and sterilization of those who were not fit for reproduction. Eugenics largely excluded some of the majority members of the society such as those who are not able to be discouraged to get married. Additionally the act is against the human morality in the society leading to neglecting of such members who instead of getting the moral support they become more disadvantaged (Chesterton, 2014). Therefore, despite the efforts the government renders to ensure that the practice of eugenics of human good it plays the role of discrimination against the minority not leaving the mental and the physical physically challenged ( Selgelid, 2014) .
Eugenics inevitably leads to measures that that are unethical. This statement has been evidenced by the control of the majority over the minority. This act involves programs developed in countries such as German, England and America targeting groups that include Jews, homosexuals, Muslim, Romani and other groups to be more inferior, this has generally brought into the conflict between people of different beliefs in the society ( Pan, 2015) .
It is an immoral act to decide on the well-being of an individual. Eugenics experts have the guts of deciding the normal life of an individual. In this case, the concept of eugenics gives the notion that some people are of less value while others are more valuable than others are simply because of their living conditions such as poverty, lack of education and physical state example the disabled and the mentally challenged (Chesterton, 2014).
Individuals found unfit were segregated in institutions. These were such as mental hospitals, tuberculosis sanatoriums and homes for the so-called mentally retarded or feeble minded. In addition to this, they were isolated from the normal society and further segregated by sex that is within the institution to prevent any attempt of procreation. According to the clergies, this act was prohibited towards the human kind. It raised many complaints from the denominations terming it, as an immoral act that should be not be condoned ( McLaren, 2015) .
The sterilization laws discriminated against the poor and the minority in the society. The laws that were put into practice in most states of America aimed largely in discriminating the less privileged and the minority in the society. In addition to this, in California for example, the rates of sterilization amongst the blacks and the foreign immigrants doubled the general population in the respective states. It led to what is termed stigma amongst the blacks and the immigrants and felt not of importance in the face of the whites (McGuirk, 2015).
Even though eugenics had negative impacts on the society, the modern eugenics in science sector has enhanced the procreation. In addition to this, it enhances one to choose the genes for his or her child could create a new beginning for society and health matters. The main goal of neo-eugenics is for the good of the human nature and the well-being as compared to the old eugenics (Chesterton, 2014).
State-sponsored eugenics should be morally prohibited in that the human perspectives about eugenics are adverse as compared to the old eugenics. From the paper, it states clearly the implications eugenics drew into the human point of view. Therefore, state-sponsored eugenics should be prohibited despite the perfect knowledge and skills that the experts under genetic engineering have towards the human good in the society and health sector.
Chesterton, G. K. (2014). Eugenics and other evils. Bookpubber.
McGuirk, M. M. (2015). From Public Good to Public Disgrace: Eugenics in North Carolina.
McLaren, A. (2015). Our own master race: Eugenics in Canada, 1885-1945. University of Toronto Press
Mehler, B. (2015). Sterilized by the State: Eugenics, Race, and the Population Scare in Twentieth-Century North America: Hansen, Randall, and Desmond King Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 279 pp., $29.99, ISBN 978-1-107-65970-4 Publication Date: August 2013. History: Reviews of New Books, 43(1), 22-23.
Pan, G. (2015). Eugenics and Birth Regulation. In Socio-biological Implications of Confucianism (pp. 219-221). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Reilly, P. R. (2015). Eugenics and Involuntary Sterilization: 1907-2015. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 16(1).
Selgelid, M. J. (2014). Moderate eugenics and human enhancement. Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy, 17(1), 3-12.