Eugenics And Protestant Social Reform

The eugenics movement prior to the Second World War gave voice to the desire of many social reformers to promote good births and prevent bad births. Two sources of cultural authority in this period, science and religion, often found common cause in the promotion of eugenics. The rhetoric of biology and theology blended in strange ways through a common framework known as degeneration theory. Degeneration, a core concept of the eugenics movement, served as a key conceptual nexus between theological and scientific reflection on heredity among Protestant intellectuals and social reformers in the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century. Elite efforts at social control of the allegedly "unfit" took the form of negative eugenics. This included marriage restrictions and even sterilization for many who were identified as having a suspect heredity. Speculations on heredity were deployed in identifying the feeble-minded, hereditary criminals, hereditary alcoholics, and racial minorities as presumed hindrances to the progress of civilization. A few social reformers trained in biology, anthropology, criminology, and theology eventually raised objections to the eugenics movement. Still, many thousands of citizens on the margins were labeled as defectives and suffered human rights violations during this turbulent time of social change.

The eugenics movement prior to the Second World War gave voice to the desire of many social reformers to promote good births and prevent bad births. Two sources of cultural authority in this period, science and religion, often found common cause in the promotion of eugenics. The rhetoric of biology and theology blended in strange ways through a common framework known as degeneration theory. Degeneration, a core concept of the eugenics movement, served as a key conceptual nexus between theological and scientific reflection on heredity among Protestant intellectuals and social reformers in the late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century. Elite efforts at social control of the allegedly "unfit" took the form of negative eugenics. This included marriage restrictions and even sterilization for many who were identified as having a suspect heredity. Speculations on heredity were deployed in identifying the feeble-minded, hereditary criminals, hereditary alcoholics, and racial minorities as presumed hindrances to the progress of civilization. A few social reformers trained in biology, anthropology, criminology, and theology eventually raised objections to the eugenics movement. Still, many thousands of citizens on the margins were labeled as defectives and suffered human rights violations during this turbulent time of social change.

'Preaching Eugenics' tells how Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish leaders confronted and, in many cases, enthusiastically embraced eugenics - a movement that embodied progressive attitudes about modern science at the time.

In this history of the social and human sciences in Mexico and the United States, Karin Alejandra Rosemblatt reveals intricate connections among the development of science, the concept of race, and policies toward indigenous peoples. Focusing on the anthropologists, sociologists, biologists, physicians, and other experts who collaborated across borders from the Mexican Revolution through World War II, Rosemblatt traces how intellectuals on both sides of the Rio Grande forged shared networks in which they discussed indigenous peoples and other ethnic minorities. In doing so, Rosemblatt argues, they refashioned race as a scientific category and consolidated their influence within their respective national policy circles. Postrevolutionary Mexican experts aimed to transform their country into a modern secular state with a dynamic economy, and central to this endeavor was learning how to "manage" racial difference and social welfare. The same concern animated U.S. New Deal policies toward Native Americans. The scientists' border-crossing conceptions of modernity, race, evolution, and pluralism were not simple one-way impositions or appropriations, and they had significant effects. In the United States, the resulting approaches to the management of Native American affairs later shaped policies toward immigrants and black Americans, while in Mexico, officials rejected policy prescriptions they associated with U.S. intellectual imperialism and racial segregation.

As this book shows, between 1910 and 1942, social feminists in New Jersey waged an unsuccessful campaign for legislation that would permit eugenic sterilization of ‘feebleminded’ and other ‘undesirable’ citizens. Church archives and religious periodicals described the conflict between Catholic and Protestant citizens regarding this issue. Reform-minded women persisted in their quest for such progressive state legislation despite repeated failures. Their number of potential voters was very small compared to the organized bloc of Catholic citizens who viewed such legislation as immoral and based on bad science, and threatened to unseat any legislator who supported such a notion. This insightful text highlights that public officials would only enact such laws when they were convinced that many citizens supported a particular eugenic goal and then would vote for legislators who satisfied this moral challenge. Public opinion was unprepared for such radical legislation in New Jersey, and legislators learned that to even consider a eugenic sterilization notion would be political suicide.

With our success in mapping the human genome, the possibility of altering our genetic futures has given rise to difficult ethical questions. Although opponents of genetic manipulation frequently raise the specter of eugenics, our contemporary debates about bioethics often take place in a historical vacuum. In fact, American religious leaders raised similarly challenging ethical questions in the first half of the twentieth century. Preaching Eugenics tells how Protestant, Catholic, and Jewish leaders confronted and, in many cases, enthusiastically embraced eugenics-a movement that embodied progressive attitudes about modern science at the time. Christine Rosen argues that religious leaders pursued eugenics precisely when they moved away from traditional religious tenets. The liberals and modernists-those who challenged their churches to embrace modernity-became the eugenics movement's most enthusiastic supporters. Their participation played an important part in the success of the American eugenics movement. In the early twentieth century, leaders of churches and synagogues were forced to defend their faiths on many fronts. They faced new challenges from scientists and intellectuals; they struggled to adapt to the dramatic social changes wrought by immigration and urbanization; and they were often internally divided by doctrinal controversies among modernists, liberals, and fundamentalists. Rosen draws on previously unexplored archival material from the records of the American Eugenics Society, religious and scientific books and periodicals of the day, and the personal papers of religious leaders such as Rev. John Haynes Holmes, Rev. Harry Emerson Fosdick, Rev. John M. Cooper, Rev. John A. Ryan, and biologists Charles Davenport and Ellsworth Huntington, to produce an intellectual history of these figures that is both lively and illuminating. The story of how religious leaders confronted one of the era's newest "sciences," eugenics, sheds important new light on a time much like our own, when religion and science are engaged in critical and sometimes bitter dialogue.