In the third paragraph of Roe v. Wade, Harry Blackmun writes, "In addition, population growth, pollution, poverty, and racial overtones tend to complicate and not to simplify the problem." Oooooh, that's a suggestive little sentence. Harry seems to be acknowledging the liberal obsession with controlling the number of people in a society. This is an obsession dating back to Plato, at least. "For in our state, population has a limit."
Harry also foreshadows the liberal obsession with carbon-dioxide. Too many air-breathers! If only we could get rid of some of those air-breathers.
What the hell does pollution have to do with abortion? Why is this "pollution" word in Roe v. Wade? Maybe it's cause the world is dirty. Dirty, dirty, dirty. And we need to clean it up. In a nice, sanitized doctor's office. We will clean up our dirty world and keep those dirty people from reproducing with that dirty sex thing they do. Humanity is so dirty and we must stop it!
Oh, Harry Blackmun doesn't write these sentences. But as he puts this "pollution" word in Roe v. Wade, you have to wonder what the hell is going on in his subconscious. It's complicated. Maybe if we give them a right to abort, the dirty people will terminate their own offspring? Maybe that's a solution. We'll apply one of our famous balancing tests. Bring out the ol' judicial scales. Eugenics, bad. Making unpopular racial groups disappear by force, bad. But abortion is voluntary. Maybe that's a solution? It's definitely complicated. Luckily, the Supreme Court has a plan. A plan for us all!
As the Supreme Court wrote in 1927, "It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. (Three) generations of imbeciles is enough."
Yes, let's all sing the Anomalies song!
What makes this complicated, of course, is the ugly liberal history of eugenics, which in Germany morphed into the Holocaust. Eugenics is a progressive plan to force undesirable people to stop reproducing. You could perhaps castrate them like a dog, or in the more refined 20th century version, force them to be sterilized.
Buck v. Bell, of course, upheld a statute written by elected representatives. Roe v. Wade is a bit more notorious. Among other reasons, unelected people are now crafting our laws. On the plus side, the Supreme Court is not forcing anybody to undergo an abortion. Undesirable people can still breed. But if you undesirable people decide not to breed, that's definitely right. It's right, right, right. Particularly if something is wrong with your baby. Not that we're imposing our value system on the American people or anything like that. We're just trying to do our little part to stop pollution.