Catholic Exchange

Nobel Prize Winner Is More Than Anti-Semitic

Written by

Catholic League

in

In the January edition of Esquire, there is a comment by James D. Watson justifying anti-Semitism. Watson, who won the Nobel Prize for his co-discovery of DNA, offers as one of his musings a rhetorical question: "Should you be allowed to make an anti-Semitic remark?" To which he says, "Yes, because some anti-Semitism is justified."

Catholic League president Bill Donohue responded as follows:

"The ADL's response to Watson's remark is, ‘Those are very strange comments coming from an individual like that.' What is ‘very strange' is not Watson's comment, but the ADL's puzzlement. Watson is a eugenicist who, like Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, is a racist. Unlike Sanger, who was opposed to abortion, Watson is not only pro-abortion, he is on record recommending that handicapped infants be killed immediately after birth.

"In 2000, Watson told an audience at the University of California at Berkeley that African Americans are genetically prone to laziness, obesity and have more active sex drives than whites. This is the same man who thinks that we should change the legal definition of ‘person' to infants older than three days: this way parents would be able to decide if their child should live or die.

"Anyone remotely informed about the ‘population control' fanatics knows that they have always pushed for a public-policy filter that would ‘weed out' the ‘undesirables.' To be specific, those who are below par in cognitive abilities or physical attributes, as well as those who belong to certain racial, religious or ethnic groups, should not enjoy equal rights; at the very least, their numbers should be restricted. Sound familiar?

"Watson gave up his Catholicism at the age of 12 for birdwatching. Despite his scientific heroics, we'd all have been better off if he never took his eyes off the birds."

Comments

  1. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    I didn’t realize that Margaret Sanger was opposed to abortion. I wonder how she would feel if she knew that the organization she founded is now the single largest abortion “provider” in the country? Although this Watson almost makes Sanger look good!

  2. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    The writers of this article have made a GROSS ERROR! According to the Couple to Couple League’s research (a solid Catholic organization which teaches NFP to couples and for whom I was an NFP instructor for more than 25 years), Sanger was adamantly PRO-ABORTION! In fact, it was the whole reason she began PP. Her “advisors” informed her that abortion would not fly in the U.S. but artificial means of birth control would. And once people accepted that, the natural outgrowth would be ABORTION! Thus Planned Parenthood was begun with the ultimate goal of swaying the American public to believe their propaganda that abortion is not only necessary but a good to society.

  3. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    By his own standards, I can declare . . .

    ‘Old fools who have used up their facility among us should be put to sleep before they say any more stupid nonsense than that to which they have already subjected us’.
    ‘I second the motion’.
    ‘All in favor for the permanent demotion (‘permanent demotion’ so much more soothingly euphemistic that euthanizing) of this one James Watson, hold your hand up and say ‘aye’, now’ . . .
    ‘Without need of seeking a ‘nay’ vote due to the obvious majority, please take Mr. Watson to a nice quiet room and let him pick out his means of permanent demotion’.

    Somehow, I figure that they can come up with some eugenic reason for euthani . . . oops, permanently demoting . . . the elderly; something about age-corrupted genes, maybe.

    Through Christ, with Christ, in Christ,

    Pristinus Sapienter

    (wljewell @catholicexchange.com or … yahoo.com)

  4. Guest Avatar
    Guest

    It has been 20 years since I read Sanger, but if I remember right Margaret Sanger flip-flopped in her opinion on the practice of abortion as birth control. She was against it for a while after witnessing how it was done in Germany. The Germans at the time basically did butchery on women (pre-antibiotics). I believe this was either before WWI or between the wars (in her pro-Nazi period). Her objections were that it had high mortality and she did never liked it for white women…she always thought it was fine for the “colored”, especially after penicillin became available. She never cared a bit about the children being killed.

    Sanger wrote a number of books to support herself…they are easily available in most university libraries. Check the online library catalog for your local university. She is quite open about being pro-eugenic; as well as, racist, anti-Semitic, anti-catholic, anti-poverty, anti-epileptic, anti-“feeble minded”, anti-disease, and other such stuff.

Leave a Reply

More posts