“If individuals want to terminate an otherwise wanted pregnancy due to a prenatal diagnosis, I support their decision. It’s time to affirmatively support the right to eugenic abortion, even as we fight the need for it.”

That doesn't sound like something a man with a special needs child would say, but it is. It was written by Professor David M. Perry of the University of Minnesota (yep, the taxpayers pay his salary), whose young son has Down syndrome, Daily Wire reports. In his piece for The Nation, he said that:

“The anti-choice movement is trying to use the public’s positive feelings about cute kids with Down syndrome, like my son, to undermine reproductive rights."

Abortion advocates have long pretended that eugenics wasn't part of their agenda. At least they're being honest now. Perry says that Republicans and the "anti-choice" movement is "playing on fears of eugenics." Maybe because eugenics is a scary road to start down? Just throwing that out there.

Just a few months ago, CBS reported that Down syndrome is disappearing in Iceland. It isn't disappearing; those with Down syndrome are being exterminated in the womb. That's hardly the same thing. 

Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life America agrees that supporting eugenics is a bad idea. She told The Daily Wire:

“For anyone to promote eugenics is downright disgusting, but to have a professor and academic adviser promote eugenics is even worse. Perry is just another example of an extremely pro-abortion professor who preaches an anti-life message and lacks any sort of coherent moral framework.”

Destiny Herndon-De La Rosa, founder and president of New Wave Feminists, a pro-life feminist organization found Perry's views "ignorant." She told TruthRevolt:

"I should’ve dusted off my leotard for the mental gymnastics David Perry just put me through. How in one breath can he say his son’s 'value as a human is intrinsic,' and in the next claim everyone has a right to discard other human beings as they see fit? Once we start determining others' value based on the sacrifices or benefits we get from their existence we are entering a very dangerous territory. It must be nice for Perry to live in a world with no history, so he can walk with the ignorant bliss of not knowing where this line of thinking often times leads."

However, Herndon-De La Rosa found a ray of hope in the piece, however unintentional:

"The one redeeming line in this article is when Perry mentions 'prioritizing bodily autonomy' thereby acknowledged that indeed two bodies exist in this scenario. And whether he meant to expose this truth or not, he clearly thinks the stronger and more powerful one should be able to kill the weaker."

Hardly surprising, since that's what eugenic abortion is all about. Dad of the Year!