If Cuccinelli were leading in polls -- even his own poll -- appealing to the far right with abstruse arguments that have almost no appeal to swing voters probably wouldn't be a very good idea with only eight days until the election.
There are large social and ethical considerations that mitochondrial replacement forces us to confront. Most importantly, this technology raises one of the thorniest questions humanity will ever face: are we willing to genetically modify future generations of humans?
North Carolina-based writer Belle Boggs became interested in the tale and wrote the 46-page Kindle Single For the Public Good: Forced Sterilization and the Fight for Compensation, an outstanding work of long-form investigative journalism published a few weeks ago.
For an institution like Harvard to say that there is merit to an idea that has already been discredited, like the idea that IQ is based on race ethnic origin, doesn't advance academic work. It legitimizes racism and discriminatory practices.
These miraculous discoveries present us with countless dilemmas and are far outpacing our abilities to grasp and address their ethical, legal and social implications. We need more public and professional education and attention to how it is affecting our lives and how it should affect our lives.
Throughout history, dominant groups have depicted or represented minority groups in a variety of negative ways in order to maintain control or mastery. I have found many clear and stunning connections between historical representations of LGBT people and Jewish people.
Ever since The Science of Desire by Dean Hamer (1993), the scientific world and gays and lesbians around the world have been plagued by the idea of a single gene controlling human sexual orientation. The specter of de-gaying by gene therapy has haunted us ever since.
What of legacy? Did the violent effects of eugenically-charged language die with the discrediting of the eugenics movement, or do they continue, protected by the shroud of historical forgetfulness? There are hints.
Is there any connection between the eugenics movement and the anti-choice movement? Forcing a woman to give birth -- which the anti-choice movement effectively requires -- really is not that different conceptually from preventing her from giving birth.
Today, the idea of the state medically taking away someone's right to procreate against their will seems impossible. But from the 1930s to the late 1970s, North Carolina used eugenics to justify mandatory sterilization of people with mental disabilities, criminals and other undesirables.