'Unspeakably Evil': Tech Executive Brags About Implementing a Brutal New Form of Eugenics on the Most Vulnerable

When discussing the often uncomfortable but necessary topic of being pro-life, the conversation almost always leads to one focal point.

And that’s abortion.

However, the pro-life perspective encompasses far more than just that single, abhorrent act. It’s time to engage in another challenging discussion—one about in vitro fertilization (IVF).

IVF, though widely accepted across the political spectrum, is undeniably part of the pro-life dialogue and presents a particularly complex moral dilemma.

On the surface, the desire for more people to have children is undoubtedly positive, and IVF is primarily sought as a solution for infertility.

Yet, at the same time, the methods used to achieve this outcome are deeply troubling.

Imagine a chilling scenario: Your wife is expecting, and early medical screenings indicate a possibility of a health condition in the baby. Instead of choosing to give birth to a child who might have medical challenges, you decide to end that life.

Or worse, you choose to freeze the child indefinitely.

This is precisely the practice IVF employs, and regardless of how many support it, it remains deeply disturbing.

The ethical concerns surrounding IVF came into sharp focus this week when The New York Times, in what felt like a tasteless April Fools’ prank, published an article about a company called Orchid.

According to the article, Orchid “screens embryos’ DNA for hundreds of conditions, such as retinitis pigmentosa, which can be traced to a single genetic variant. But the company also goes further, offering what is known as polygenic screening, which gives parents what is essentially a risk profile on each embryo’s propensity for conditions such as heart disease, for which the genetic component is far more complex.”

Unsurprisingly, the article sidestepped addressing what happens to the embryos that test positive for these conditions.

As previously noted, the outcome for these so-called "embryos"—or rather, human lives—is grim, for anyone with a moral conscience.

Orchid’s founder, Noor Siddiqui, took to X to celebrate the article, sharing her personal, albeit misguided, motivation for launching the company:

“When I was in elementary school, my mom started going blind. Retinitis pigmentosa,” Siddiqui posted.

“No family history. No treatments. No cure. I got lucky. She didn’t.”

Driven by an insatiable pursuit of knowledge, Siddiqui established Orchid, seemingly to reshape human reproduction in pursuit of the most “desirable” traits.

There’s a term for that. Oh, right:

“This is eugenics and has no place in a moral society.”

— Hooch (@CompanyHooch) April 2, 2025

One X user called out Siddiqui, unequivocally denouncing her vision.

Catholic philosopher Edward Feser didn’t even need to use the term “eugenics” to underscore the moral depravity of what Siddiqui was promoting.

“This isn’t a matter of saving any baby from these disorders, but of discarding embryos who may have them,” Feser posted.

“It shows no compassion for any child, but only the most obscene selfishness on the part of parents,” he warned. “It isn’t good, but unspeakably evil. And it’s what promoting IVF entails.”

I couldn’t have put it better myself.