"Tendencies fostered by the modern social organism are injuring the race, in the opinion of Prof. Keller, and invite a natural retribution....
War itself, once a valuable selective agency, exposes the strongest and the fleetest to the bomb and the bullet, to the diseases and temptations of military service, to irregular habits, delayed marriage, and diminished families. The confinements of the industrial organization kill off the biologically fitter.
....Even the development of medicine, hygiene, and dietetics rears to maturity fathers of weakly families who might have fallen early beneath the scythe of natural selection.
....a new set of marriage taboos may gain vogue for the production of a race of superior beings."
(Folk Ways and Eugenics
The New York Times; Aug 14, 1908 pg. 6)
It seems to me that the progressive university professors (in that case, one from Yale) and the like have always had a certain tendency, a tendency based on Naturalism to undermine traditional marriage. It is so common that one might almost think that there was some ancient covenant based on marriage at issue. The progressive eugenics movement wanted to create a "...new set of marriage taboos..." then, and progressives now would exchange venerated tradition and valid taboos for same-sex marriage based on the latest pseudo-scientific nonsense. The other day I was thinking, since SSM seems to be such "The Issue" for them at this point ins history, that which brings ought the censorious side of Leftist bigots, that it would be easy to just avoid it. I have been censored off of two Leftist blogs based on this issue. But I think it was Luther who said that one can support all the points of the truth, except that one which is the one currently under attack, and so be lending a tacit support to evil. It is an evil to purposefully deny children their father/fathering and mother/mothering just to support the latest pseudo-scientific vogue of "progressives." What "progress" they seem to want to make in denial of Romance, Covenant and millenia of moral teachings. These progressives seem more like regressives, preaching a reversion to subpagan hedonism (the modern SSM) or tribalism (the old Eugenics). Each one is the issue of the day, in its time. Yet how quickly Eugenics is to be forgotten in exchange for the latest regressive vogue.