Should people be sterilized against their will?

Why sabotage a guy's yoink?! That's like cutting off someone's hand for stealing an apple. Sure, they'll never do it again. But it's a medieval man's way in a un-medieval world.

Which is bad, BTW.

There. That's more than I prefer to say on the subject. Thank you for your time.

 

Many Africans are prime candidates for sterilization.

Why is this?

 

AIDS - in 20 years, more than half the continent's present population will be dead if no significant AIDS retardant or cure can be found. Yes, they can still spread it to other people, but the next generation will hopefully then come from AIDS free folk.

But that's essentially the same idea as putting all those with AIDS on an island and firebombing it. Both are tricky when you get down the whole "humanitarian" idea.

 

DevilsAdvocate
All mentally ill people should be sterilized, even if only in a temporary manner. They are incapable of supporting children and raising them well.

Woah there I completely disagree with this statement. First of all you'd be steralizing a large precentage of the population if you steralized everyone who had ADD, Depression, Schizophrenia, etc all of which are mental illnesses. I have a friend who's mother is bipolar and her mother, and father for that matter, have raised her very well and she is one of the smartest, most talented, hard-working, students I know.

I must say that I take great offence now that I have been told that I should be steralized. I have a mental illness, it's called Major Depression.

 

A biochemical imbalance is not indicative of a serious mental handicap.

For one so gung-ho about the "evolution of science", CarbonKnight, you appear to have very little faith in genetic research. Or sociology. Or child psychology. Or any other classified field developed since the Middle Ages.

 

A biochemical imbalance is not indicative of a serious mental handicap.

Exactly, thank you Warning Drill, and he did say all mentally ill should be steralized.

 

Ah, just when you thought that controversy wasnt tolerated. Allow me to add in another perspective to this hopefully "non-flame" discussion about this very enlightened subject.

I am a Children's Services Social Worker in California. I deal with COMPLETELY unfit parents on a daily basis. Nearly all the social workers in the agency I work in, agree that there are some individuals who should be sterilized,forcibly if necessary. Until, you witness the type of inhuman conditions that these parents inflict on their own children, you cannot grasp the feelings of wishing that unfit parents should be sterilized.

There is an individual in the system that has fathered 23 children, most of them were found with hardcore drugs in their system. This guy has told us that he wants to father as many children as possible before he dies. IMO, this guy is more dangerous to society than a guy with a loaded gun. It is unthinkable that this guy should be NOT be sterilized.

On a sidenote, nobody here has discussed the fact that sterilization doesnt have to be a permanent thing. Vasectomies are 99% reversable. Individuals who "prove themselves to society" can have their sterilizations reversed. In our litigous society, we make individuals get licenses for almost anything, but not to be a parent. There is nothing more serious than being a parent. Being a parent is more dangerous than owning a gun, car, or a business!! Our priorites are all messed up.

If you are open minded about this subject read "The Bell Curve". This book is most enlightening!!!

Another thing that WE ALL need to realize....Reproductive technologies are quickly making reproductive rights almost a moot point. Biotech companies are going to make "Gattica" a reality!! All the opposition in the world isnt going to stop genetically engineered humans from becoming a reality. ITS COMING, get ready!!! This is your Future, like it or not!!

 

Of course there should be sterilization. We humans just aren't smart enough to put it in to effect yet. Give us another 100 years and maybe.

 

Uh, no.

What's to say down the road that you might not meet certain intelligence requirements by the people who legislate these procedures?

A person who isn't particularly smart may have a beneficial mutation such as resistance to aids or any other type of virus. Genetic diversity is important to humanity.

 

I am not going to say anything else because AYBABTU said it.

I don't know why he was banned instead of the person that made this thread.
I think he really means it, but the fact is, he is trolling with his stupid and scary ideas.

How is this different from "Palapatine does NOT equal Sideous" threads?

More to come in the Senate Floor:

"All people should be killed"
"America=Evil, Al Quida=Good"
"Nazies were the best thing to happen to this planet"
"Male and Female Pronouns=Sexist"
"Adultery, not bad?"
"No Morals means you can do whatever the hell you want"
"{insert stupid inflamatory topic here, I can't think of any more right now}"

 

This is a valid topic when viewing the prison system of America because it has been put into use with select rapists and child molesters. They have been castrated as a part of "rehabilitation", curbing their impulses.

That being said, what about prisoner sterilization in certain instances? Argue that and forget entirely about the unfair and inhumane practice of sterilizing the mentally ill or retarded.

That topic no longer has any meaning in this thread and CarbonKnight, you would do well to rethink what you've said and what others have said about that topic. A closing note: the mentally ill or retarded often don't reproduce because they don't know how, want to or are passively held back by the competent in their lives. You don't really have to worry about them procreating; it is a rarity that they do.

 

I agree that there is an aspect of this that could be discussed in a reasonable manner, but it isn't going to happen here because of a certain facist.

 

I will warn you once and once only to watch your tone.

If it can be addressed reasonably, do that. Flame and I might just delete random posts.

 

A closing note: the mentally ill or retarded often don't reproduce because they don't know how, want to or are passively held back by the competent in their lives. You don't really have to worry about them procreating; it is a rarity that they do.

Uhm I wouldn't say that it's a rarity that the mentally ill reproduce...let's see my mom has a mental illness, several of my friend's parents' have mental illnesses.

 

I am not going to say anything else because AYBABTU said it.

I don't know why he was banned instead of the person that made this thread.
I think he really means it, but the fact is, he is trolling with his stupid and scary ideas.

Yeah, I am very suprised I wasn't banned for my views on the subject. I mean, who am I to question society? What gives me the right to express my opinion?

I agree that there is an aspect of this that could be discussed in a reasonable manner, but it isn't going to happen here because of a certain facist.

Oooh. It's like you've known me all my life!

I am a Children's Services Social Worker in California. I deal with COMPLETELY unfit parents on a daily basis. Nearly all the social workers in the agency I work in, agree that there are some individuals who should be sterilized,forcibly if necessary. Until, you witness the type of inhuman conditions that these parents inflict on their own children, you cannot grasp the feelings of wishing that unfit parents should be sterilized.

This is exactly the reason I feel that the rights of an individual to reproduce should be taken away, and why I view abortion in some cases as a blessing.

Uhm I wouldn't say that it's a rarity that the mentally ill reproduce...let's see my mom has a mental illness, several of my friend's parents' have mental illnesses.

Actually, I want to clarify this. I have used the term "mentally retarded" each and every time, never mentally ill. Mentally retarded in this definition is about the range of Down Syndrome, not ADD or Bipolar, or common illnesses like that.

That topic no longer has any meaning in this thread and CarbonKnight, you would do well to rethink what you've said and what others have said about that topic. A closing note: the mentally ill or retarded often don't reproduce because they don't know how, want to or are passively held back by the competent in their lives. You don't really have to worry about them procreating; it is a rarity that they do.

I understand all viewpoints, and in many ways I have conflicting thoughts on the matter. Of course, in many ways I try to question the decisions society has made for us. And if straying from the mainstream, means I'm a "facist" (sic), then so be it.

Lord Bane, excellent point.

 

CarbonKnight

Actually, I want to clarify this. I have used the term "mentally retarded" each and every time, never mentally ill. Mentally retarded in this definition is about the range of Down Syndrome, not ADD or Bipolar, or common illnesses like that.

Yeah I know that you have used the phrase mentally retarded, if you read my above post(not the one you quoted but one that I posted two before that) you'll see that I was referring to DevilsAdvocate who said that all mentally ill should be steralized. I don't agree with some of your opinions but I was outright offended by the comment DevilsAdvocate made since he basically told me that I should be steralized. I did also disagree with Bane saying the mentally ill do not frequently reproduce.

 

forget entirely about the unfair and inhumane practice of sterilizing the mentally ill or retarded.

Aww, man. You took all the fun out of the thread Just kidding.

I can agree with sterilizing certain convicts, or the man mentioned a few posts ago who had 23 kids. I think that it would all depend on a case to case basis. I still think that forced sterilization is an extreme measure though.

 

I did also disagree with Bane saying the mentally ill do not frequently reproduce.

I can't really speak for Bane, but I'm quite certain it was merely a slip of the "toungue". I imagine he meant that the mentally retarded (along the lines of Down Syndrome, or Charlie of Algernon fame for example) do not frequently reproduce.

 

I think it would infringe upon people's constitutional rights to reproduce if there was forced sterilization.

HOWEVER, as much as I am against any form of a big brother govt. control I would not be opposed to the following people right's being violated [yes I know that's redundant]

1.convicted murderers
2.serial rapists
3.pedophiles
4.people who are convicted of
3 or more violent crimes.
5.people who are already on welfare
and have more than 4 children.
6.people who have been convicted of
[serious] child endangerment. i.e
when parents get arrested continuously
and/or not acting in the best interest
of their child.
7.Any parent who is arrested for
multiple drug use/possession.
I would say the 3 strike rule would
count.
8.Basically just the scum of the Earth.


Okay, now I know I did not go into a lot of detail with this list, but try to think logically here. I know in my mind that it would be unconstitutional but basically in would be in the common interest for the majority. Now while I know that's not a valid argument, I think we can all agree that if we "thin the herd" so to speak we would all be better off and this country would be a better place to live.

Do not get me wrong I would be strogly opposed to sterilization. I would only want it for those who meet very, very, very, high standards[crimes if you will]. I'm not implying if you get convicted once of involuntary manslaughter for losing control of your car and killing someone they should just automatically sterilize you.

I would only want the basic scum of this Earth to be sterile.

 

I would only want the basic scum of this Earth to be sterile.

Does sterilizing them make them any less scum? Not really, no. But it does prevent them from procreating.

There are two reasons to prevent them from procreating (or to remove their 'drive' to do so):

1. They're serially disturbed rapists/pedophiles who'll keep comitting crimes (that's the only valid reason I see).

2. To prevent their scummy genes from continuing on this earth.

Number one is a valid reason (or not, if you see procreation as a basic human right); number two isn't. A lot of people have scummy genes in them. A lot of people are pre-disposed to do certain things. But unless your goal is to create a perfect society or race (ala Hitler), you've no business preventing them from procreating.

There hasn't been a person on this earth who hasn't struggled with some personal demon, be it a physical handicap or a mental one. Winston Churchill, for instance, suffered from depression.

But I'd rather have more people like him around, even if they are depressed, thank you very much

 

And, if straying from the mainstream, means I'm a "facist" (sic), then so be it.


My thoughts exactly, CarbonKnight. However, I'm used to being called a commie.

 

Yes.

If you are conservative and a liberal person doesn't like you, he calls you a fascist.

If you are liberal and a conservative person doesn't like you, he calls you a commie.

It's a fact of life.

 

It's a fact of life

I wouldn't call it a fact necessarily, I'd call it a misinformed stereotype. I do understand what you're getting at, but it is a terrible misuse of those words.

 

I would like to comment on the link about Eugenics that was provided by Ramius.

This was about the "OLD" Eugenics movement. Even though the concept remains the same, improve the genepool by selective breeding, the Modern Eugenics is far more advanced. The old Eugenics movement knew nothing about DNA or genetic engineering. Their drive to "selective breed" people had its roots in "pseudo-science" and racisim.

The new Eugenics movement has the tools of modern science at its disposal. We realize that all ethnic groups have something to offer to the genepool. The "Uberman" that is oft refered to, would be composed of all the ethnic groups' genetic code. I feel that the link was unfair and gives people the wrong idea about Eugenics in general. I DO feel that the old Eugenics movement was wrong and if Ramius was trying to expose their ignorance, then that was justified. Just realize that their was a difference between the movements. Also the concept of Eugenics isnt a FACIST or EVIL concept, it is actually a tool that can be used to improve humanity. In fact, when the time is right, Eugenics will become the future of mankind.

 

there is nothing wrong with giving your opinion but you also dont have to word it in a way that will be considered flaming or that will get you banned I think that debates and discussions is why this particular set of threads was set up in the first place but there is a limit as to how far things should be allowed to go. There is no need in attacking people because of their viewpoint

please cant we have a debate with out all the personal attacks all im asking is that we try and tone down the hostility in here and continue to stay on topic without attacks