The Unfabricated History of Eugenics

Posted by Robert Reis on January 12, 2011, 01:22 PM | #

‘Gentile sperm leads to barbaric offspring’

Rabbi Dov Lior rules that Jewish Law prohibits sterile couples from getting pregnant using non-Jewish man’s sperm, as it causes adverse traits. On subject of single mothers he says, ‘Child cannot be 100% normal’
Kobi Nahshoni
Published:  01.12.11, 08:30

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4006385,00.html

Rabbi Dov Lior, a senior authority on Jewish law in the Religious Zionism movement, asserted recently that a Jewish woman should never get pregnant using sperm donated by a non-Jewish man – even if it is the last option available.

According to Lior, a baby born through such an insemination will have the “negative genetic traits that characterize non-Jews.” Instead, he advised sterile couples to adopt. 
Lior addressed the issue during a women’s health conference held recently at the Puah Institute, a fertility clinic. His conservative stance negated a ruling widely accepted by rabbis, which states that sperm donated by a non-Jew is preferable to that of an anonymous Jew, who might pose a genealogical risk.
“Sefer HaChinuch (a book of Jewish law) states that the character traits of the father pass on to the son,” he said in the lecture. “If the father in not Jewish, what character traits could he have? Traits of cruelty, of barbarism! These are not traits that characterize the people of Israel.”
Lior added identified Jews as merciful, shy and charitable – qualities that he claimed could be inherited. “A person born to Jewish parents, even if they weren’t raised on the Torah – there are things that are passed on (to him) in the blood, it’s genetic,” he explained. “If the father is a gentile, then the child is deprived of these things.
“I even read in books that sometimes the crime, the difficult traits, the bitterness – a child that comes from these traits, it’s no surprise that he won’t have the qualities that characterize the people of Israel,” he added.
‘Kids born to single moms become criminals’
Lior condemned artificial insemination and sperm donation in general, saying that they lead to waste of sperm, unclear genealogy and other Jewish law offenses. He warned against undergoing intrauterine insemination at hospitals, where the workers may mix sperm samples for one reason or another - a major halachic violation.

On the subject of women who freeze their eggs to use at a later date, the rabbi asserted that instead they should concentrate their efforts on getting married younger.
“Our public has been influenced by a part of the Western culture in which every woman, instead of becoming a mother, needs to get a Masters Degree,” he lamented. “The role of women – child rearing – is not less important than an academic degree.” Lior noted that there is nothing wrong with attaining a profession, but it should not be a priority.
Moreover, the rabbi spoke against single women getting pregnant.

“We can understand the desire of every woman to have a child, but according to our Torah it is impossible to address the demand of a certain woman when it can cause someone else suffering,” he said. 

“If a child is born without a father, he cannot be 100% normal.” He stated that rabbinical literature defines these kids as “criminals and subjects of other negative phenomena.”

Posted by Sam Davidson on January 13, 2011, 07:45 PM | #

Thank you for this review, Matt Nuenke. The topic brings up many familiar questions regarding Jews. Perhaps you will find my research on South African Jewry to be of interest when it is completed.

Posted by Guessedworker on January 13, 2011, 07:48 PM | #

How are you intending to publish that, Sam?

Posted by Sam Davidson on January 14, 2011, 12:09 AM | #

That’s a good question. I had been planning to offer it to the Occidental Observer to post in sections.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on January 14, 2011, 12:21 AM | #

If you were to enhance it with a little humor, you might get a more serious audience.

Posted by Guy on January 14, 2011, 12:40 AM | #

From the review:

2002: According to researchers at the University of Haifa and the Sheba Medical Center, donor insemination is “highly curtained” in Israel and “camouflaged” as a treatment for male infertility, but is in reality a “popular mode of conception” even among singles. Israel has 16 sperm banks, and the greatest number of in vitro fertilizations per capita of any country in the world. Israeli Jewish women tend to choose sperm from tall Ashkenazi men with light brown hair and light colored eyes. In the words of the researchers, “these ideals are couched in the hegemonic discourse of Israeli Ashkenazi groups.”

It is also popular for Jewish women in the diaspora to buy sperm from Nordic sperm banks.  They especially seek Scandinavian features—‘Nordic Jews.’

Posted by Al Ross on January 14, 2011, 07:49 PM | #

Thank you, Matt, for this.

A Jewish “IQ expert” called Shenk gives us “The Truth About IQ” here :

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2009/07/the-truth-about-iq/22260/

May we have your views on this stuff please?

Posted by Robert Reis on January 20, 2011, 01:46 AM | #

Abercrombie, the birthers’ best friend in spite of himself
A reader and M.D. who has been highly skeptical of birtherism now says, “The latest from Abercrombie has convinced me that something important is being concealed.”

Posted by Lawrence Auster at 09:23 PM

The meaning of Abercrombie’s tacit admission that he hasn’t found the birth certificate
Bruce B. writes:

A question on this entry: what contents of a birth certificate could be damaging to a person in an advanced liberal society? What could a birth certificate reveal other than the fact that his father isn’t who we think?

LA replies:

We know for a self-evident fact that Obama has been concealing his birth certificate. Therefore we know that there is something about the circumstances of his birth which, advanced liberal society or not, he himself regards as so damaging that he feels he must conceal it. He may have been born out of wedlock, which is highly likely, given that Barack Sr. was married to a Kenyan woman when he met Stanley Ann. Even if advanced liberal society claimed not to care about that, Obama may care very much about it. Or he may be the son of a man other than Barack Obama Sr. Given that he has constructed his entire identity around his “dreams from his father,” if it turned out that Obama Sr. was not his father, Obama Jr.’s entire life would be revealed as a fraud.
Or it may be that Obama was legitimate and the son of Obama Sr., but was not born in Hawaii, which would also reveal his life story as a lie. Or perhaps his parents were married but he was not born in the U.S., which would mean that he was not a natural born citizen and thus not qualified to be U.S. President, as has been discussed in detail here.

Whatever the truth is, this much is now at least provisionally demonstrated as true: that the birth certificate is not there. Either it has been destroyed, meaning that Obama had it destroyed in order to cover up the truth about himself, or it never existed, at least in Hawaii. Either way, it is now established, not as a fantasy in the bigoted brains of birthers, but as something close to a certainty, that the circumstances of Obama’s birth are unknown. We do not know the truth about Obama’s birth. But we do know something. We know that we do not know the truth about his birth. And such knowledge of not knowing is itself a form of truth. It is indeed the primary truth that the birthers have been insisting on all along; and now, given Gov. Abercrombie’s apparent inability to find the birth certificate of Barack Obama in the official records of the state of which he, Abercrombie, is the governor, it is a truth that can no longer be denied.

Abercrombie’s failure to find the birth certificate is even more spectacular and damaging to Obama and his defenders, given that in October 2008, Chiyome Fukino, the Director of the Hawaii Department of Health, formally stated that she had “seen and verified that the Hawai’i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.” See, at the above linked entry, my discussion of this patently misleading statement.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at 07:12 PM

There is no Obama birth certificate in Hawaii
Many individuals with inquiring minds have requested a copy of Barack Obama’s birth certificate from the government of the state of Hawaii, and they’ve all been turned down, because, they were told, they had no need to know. This has left the truth of matter in doubt: is there a birth certificate which Obama doesn’t want released, because it contains damaging information about him, or is there no birth certificate at all?

However, when the governor of Hawaii himself initiates a search for the birth certificate, and can’t find it (see my discussion today), I think we can reasonably conclude that the birth certificate doesn’t exist.

Unless, unless … Abercrombie now knows or has been told about the damaging contents of the birth certificate, and has become part of the cover-up, which he has done by indirectly hinting that he can’t find the birth certificate, and talking instead about some vague written “recording” of the birth which he has found.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at 01:00 PM

Posted by Al Ross on January 20, 2011, 04:39 AM | #

Obtaining an extract of one’s birth certificate is dead easy as I found out when I misplaced mine. The Registrar of Births and Deaths only requires your full name and the date and place of birth. New cert issued in 10 minutes. Obama is a Muslim - pest, mulatto fraud who, like all his useless Allah - howling brethern, should be booted out of the West.

Posted by Jimmy Marr on January 20, 2011, 05:04 AM | #

Obtaining an extract of one’s birth certificate is dead easy as I found out when I misplaced mine.

Did yours say Al Ross, or P. Dafyle-Proffett? 

Posted by Al Ross on January 20, 2011, 05:26 AM | #

Jimmy, my hyphenated alter ego is not sufficiently redolent of Auld Scotia.