It goes to show that not everyone who claims to be fighting for the good side has figured everything out entirely. I mean, how else could we still see people attempting to make these assertions as if they are describing a simple tuesday.
Some historical context
The reason why the very idea of eugenics is polemic has a very charged background. It might be enough to say that racism, and the best example of a fascist authoritarian racist regime, Nazism, preached eugenics as the way we ought to "save the world".
So it's not a surprise that if anyone brings up the subject it would raise a red flag in our minds. Unless the person is completely ignorant of history, there's literally no excuse for condoning or even entertaining these toxic ideas.
A Humanist Author?
Now that seems so paradoxical, my face has not recovered from the wtf expression since yesterday. A Humanist, at least as we understand it in popular culture, is someone who values all life, and yes that includes people with so called "defective genes".
The very idea that someone should not be allowed to live, or to reproduce, which is what this "humanist" author is proposing here, because of their "defective genes" is absolutely disgusting and that is me being generous.
I guess you could defend her position, by pointing out the fact that she's making a moral appeal and not commanding us to obey her position. But, and this is a pet peeve of mine, anyone who is attempting to practice moral imposition on others, is in fact inviting push back.
As you might imagine Talisma Nasreen, the so called "humanist" author is currently playing the victim card, and is saying that the right wing is attacking her for the comment. I find that to be quite pathetic, this is not a right wing left wing discussion.
This is about being true to the idea of humanism and personal freedom.