Porsafillo Preschool Academy in New York is one of those preschools where the babies are expected to learn Mandarin Chinese and C++, among other subjects that seem better suited to a college curriculum.
It also is probably the only preschool around with a neurologist on staff.
Accepting only 32 students a year out of more than 12,000 applicants, Porsafillo is the nation's most exclusive preschool.
To make the job of selecting those 32 easier, Porsafillo has instituted a program to screen the children's DNA.
According to Headmistress Rebecca Unsinn, who was a child neurologist previously, the test is looking for genetic markers that Unsinn believes indicate traits like intelligence, leadership and confidence.
And in the process, Porsafillo is weeding out a whole lot of human trafe.
Parents being what they are today, the applicants to Porsafillo don't even blink at the requirement, some going so far as to have the sample for the DNA test taken while the child is still in the womb, according to a recent NPR story.
Porsafillo is the type of school that gets children into other high-brow schools. Getting into Porsafillo is the closest thing to a guarantee of a future life on Mount Olympus.
Dr. Francis S. Collins, director of the National Institutes of Health and the former director of the National Human Genome Research Institute, has said that whatever behavioral predisposition may exist because of DNA is governed ultimately by environment and free will.
In other words, you can screen DNA all you like and still end up with a Joe Biden.
But more important is the question of access. If Joe had to rely on his own natural talents, he probably never would have made it to the vice presidency.
It's all about connections, via family, friends and now, DNA.
Having the right gene sequence will open doors. Having the wrong DNA means the doors remain closed.
Is there any doubt that this practice, left unchecked, might one day extend into other schools, possibly even public schools, then into employment, maybe housing or healthcare determinations?
A New York Times op-ed called the DNA testing "ghoulish."
Unsinn dismisses such Luddite criticism. "This is not unethical at all. If anything, it's extremely ethical. This is now no longer a subjective decision," she said. "This is a clinical test that can show us how a child will perform throughout its life."
The justification sounds disturbingly familiar. Do you deserve the thumb pointing to the right or the left? Our helpful staff will decide for you.
When opportunity is based on heritage, and a child's future can be set in the womb, isn't that the same as breeding a master race?