Lebensunvertes Leben translated from German to English means “life unworthy of life”. It was a concept applied to the T4 Project or Aktion 4 implemented by the Nazis in the late 30’s up to 1941. Its designation comes from the address of its headquarters located at Tiergartenstrasse 4, Berlin, Germany. Its purpose was to euthanize human beings, adults and children, who were deemed defective and not fit to live as part of the coming master race. We are not there yet as far as law, but we are there as far as social policy being discussed which, eventually, becomes statuary law or is handed down by judicial fiat. The two laws which have recently been in the news, those being the failed statute in Virginia and the successful one in New York are current cases in point. Because of some explanations or interpretive language in the ensuing debate, questions arose, rightly or wrongly, as to whether or not either of these bills would, in some way lead to the euthanizing of a healthy newborn baby. The question has been posed, repeatedly, to supporters of the laws, but, never fully or directly answered except with obfuscation and talking points. And by the way, for those who maintain that they don’t want the government involved in these types of decisions, let me say that the government is already involved, up to its neck, in these decisions by passing permissive legislation and by members of the bench asserting their own policy preferences in their decisions. How did we get here? Well, it didn’t just happen in the last month. It all began in the early twentieth century with the American eugenics movement and the Negro Project all of which Mary Stanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, was an integral part. These radical Progressives who advocate extreme abortion and euthanasia were for the most part, over the last hundred years, the extreme outlying fringe of society. That changed within the last forty, or so, years when they gained power by strongly influencing and it could be said, controlling academia as well as getting political leaders elected and salting the courts with radical, leftist judicial activists. Finally and decisively they accomplished Roe v. Wade which was and is the catalyst that brings us where we are today. This author became aware of what is now, in some academic and scientific circles, being referred to as “post-birth abortion”, when Steve Forbes declined financial backing to Princeton University in 1999. His reason was that they had hired Peter Singer a bioethicist who advocated giving parents the right to euthanize their newborn up to the age of 28 days after birth. My book, “American Rising”, goes into further detail on this subject in Chapter 7 which deals with “reproductive rights”. But, for now, a little more on Dr. Singer. The Guardian, in a November 5, 1999 article titled “The most dangerous man in the world”, by Kevin Toolis, states: “He is a philosopher who eats no meat or dairy and thinks that we’re no better than animals. In fact, he thinks that a chimp has more right to exist than a person , and that killing babies can be justified. He is hated and feared for daring to challenge the sanctity of human life.” Toolis continued, stating, in part: “He is a Nazi, a reincarnation of Martin Bormann, a baby killer, a philosophical hypocrite and an enemy of civilization…..”. Yet, singer presently holds the position of an Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics in the University Center for Human Values. And there are too many others like him, here and around the world. Well, at least he’s a doctor, of sorts. But, then, so were The Third Reich’s Josef Mengele and America’s Kermit Gosnell, of sorts. Three individuals with the title of doctor; one of human ethics and two of the healing arts, but, each with the common purpose of exterminating innocent human life. How did this happen? It happened because the citizens of America are becoming more and more uninformed, undereducated, uncaring and simply not paying attention. Ultimately, there will be a high price to pay.