Should society consider mandatory sterilization?

Should society consider mandatory sterilization? Is this the way to control population? Stop passing on genetic code that produces lower IQ people? Stop mental retard and other known diseases and illness that get passed onto their offspring?

Have you ever seen an entire family with mental illness and/or with a genetic disease that effects their lives so that they can not contribute to society? I have....and the numbers are outstanding..... and they continue to have more children.

Like Bill Burr says 80% of the worlds population should walk into the ocean - meaning dumb people keep making dumb children. Now this was HIS joke but if you closely look at it from a different angle WITHOUT killing off the population by having them walk into the ocean but instead use sterilization..... it makes sense. Those who are considered to have genetic defects that have offspring with low IQ's (under 70) and those who have gene defects would not be able to reproduce and could live out their life as they wish.

Not only should sterilization be considered, we should also consider the positive facts behind this idea. Controlling the population - this planet has too many humans on it. Control through sterilization. Next..... intelligence would rise dramatically maybe the first step in realizing wars can be stopped if people can sit around a table and talk like intelligent human beings but more importantly we would have healthy people who could stop from ever having the common cold or flu ever again? Rule out common illnesses and disease as they die off.... clean the genetic code.

Technology and science would faster expand making lives easier on this planet. Maybe closer to being able to feed and house everyone on this planet.... making poverty illegal.

As a licensed hunter in Europe we understand what it means by "thinning out the herd" and controlling wildlife by killing off the sick and weak animals so they don't mate with the strong and healthy animals. This DOES NOT mean we should kill off people so don't twist my words. I simply show how deer and other breeds better survive and how they have healthier offspring. We can use this example for humans HOWEVER instead of killing them we sterilize those and stop the problem by eliminating any possible offspring that end up becoming a problem on society.

What do you think should the world start a sterilization program?

You know who else liked this idea? ...


Hitler

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Should society consider mandatory sterilization? Is this the way to control population? Stop passing on genetic code that produces lower IQ people? Stop mental retard and other known diseases and illness that get passed onto their offspring?

Have you ever seen an entire family with mental illness and/or with a genetic disease that effects their lives so that they can not contribute to society? I have....and the numbers are outstanding..... and they continue to have more children.

Like Bill Burr says 80% of the worlds population should walk into the ocean - meaning dumb people keep making dumb children. Now this was HIS joke but if you closely look at it from a different angle WITHOUT killing off the population by having them walk into the ocean but instead use sterilization..... it makes sense. Those who are considered to have genetic defects that have offspring with low IQ's (under 70) and those who have gene defects would not be able to reproduce and could live out their life as they wish.

Not only should sterilization be considered, we should also consider the positive facts behind this idea. Controlling the population - this planet has too many humans on it. Control through sterilization. Next..... intelligence would rise dramatically maybe the first step in realizing wars can be stopped if people can sit around a table and talk like intelligent human beings but more importantly we would have healthy people who might or could stop from ever having the common cold or flu ever again? Rule out common illnesses and disease as they die off.

Technology and science would faster expand making lives easier on this planet. Maybe closer to being able to feed and house everyone on this planet.... making poverty illegal.

As a licensed hunter in Europe we understand what it means by "thinning out the herd" and controlling wildlife by killing off the sick and weak animals so they don't mate with the strong and healthy animals. This DOES NOT mean we should kill off people so don't twist my words. I simply show how deer and other breeds better survive and how they have healthier offspring. We can use this example for humans HOWEVER instead of killing them we sterilization those and stop the problem by eliminating offspring that end up becoming a problem on society.

What do you think should the world start a sterilization program?

Check out Buck v. Bell, the U.S. eugenics program, and, oh yeah, how Hitler praised it.
Buck v Bell

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: BadBoYeed
You know who else liked this idea? ...


Hitler

Cheap remark so I will not expand. Sounds like you qualify for the program.

Haha, touche!

What you're proposing makes some sense and it's something I've talked with others about in the past.
It might make a lot of sense on paper but how do you think the ones slotted for sterilization will take it?
Also, who gets to decide the criteria for this procedure?

I'll be the first one to say we need to cull some of the dumb out of society, but how it can be done in a fair way is the question we need to look at.

Ignoring the fact that IQ is a relatively bad method of measuring universal intelligence, this really isn't a good idea. What I would be willing to consider is the mandatory chemical sterilization of those convicted of violent crime (first extracting a sample for later use in case of acquittal.)
This is less because I believe that their violent tendencies would be inherited, and more because I believe that any such individual would likely create a home environment ultimately resulting in someone such as themselves. It is not their genetics I would wish to eliminate, but their influence as a possible parental figure.

Besides, the predominant cause of idiotic people is an idiotic culture, not their DNA.

a reply to: ShadowLink

The "dumb" are caused by society. Negative eugenics will barely have an effect in the best of scenarios.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

At least contraception for 3rd world countries

Seriously .. we send charity to help feed starving marvins and so kids don't have to drink water they also use as toilet

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I agree with your OP.

I made a similar thread a few years ago. And boy did I get flamed. The hairs on my butt hole are still singed.

Good luck.

originally posted by: ShadowLink

originally posted by: DeathSlayer

originally posted by: BadBoYeed
You know who else liked this idea? ...


Hitler

Cheap remark so I will not expand. Sounds like you qualify for the program.

Haha, touche!

What you're proposing makes some sense and it's something I've talked with others about in the past.
It might make a lot of sense on paper but how do you think the ones slotted for sterilization will take it?
Also, who gets to decide the criteria for this procedure?

I'll be the first one to say we need to cull some of the dumb out of society, but how it can be done in a fair way is the question we need to look at.

Good point but I think science has the technology to be able to do this.

An example...... if I see a person who constantly has children with birth defects.... the mother, father and those children are carriers..... these lives would be sterilized. Make sense? And then we continue from there with other known transferable diseases and illnesses.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
Ignoring the fact that IQ is a relatively bad method of measuring universal intelligence, this really isn't a good idea. What I would be willing to consider is the mandatory chemical sterilization of those convicted of violent crime (first extracting a sample for later use in case of acquittal.)

Besides, the predominant cause of idiotic people is an idiotic culture, not their genetics.

You have limited the sterilization process to only criminals. I have a criminal in my family and only ONE. The rest of us are law abiding citizens so your process of elimination is faulty.

I would hope that ATS members are mature and civil enough that this thread will not end up like so.

Though it really depends on who discovers it. Considering it is in the Science forum (for some reason) we may receive a few interesting contributions.

a reply to: BadBoYeed

So did Tesla and many others with an IQ above 100

a reply to: DeathSlayer

What was he convicted of?

Regardless, I believe people are predominantly defined by how they are raised. I listed sterilisation due to violent crime as one of the things I would consider. I did not say I supported it.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Resorting to insults when faced with an opinion you don't like? Who qualifies for whose program?

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Should society consider mandatory sterilization?

WHO constitutes as society in your opinion?

Next..... intelligence would rise dramatically maybe the first step in realizing wars can be stopped if people can sit around a table and talk like intelligent human beings but more importantly we would have healthy people who could stop from ever having the common cold or flu ever again? Rule out common illnesses and disease as they die off.... clean the genetic code.

So, by eliminating those you deem unworthy, it somehow kicks in an evolutionary jump in intelligence for everyone else? Are you stating that those sitting around discussing war and creating it, are not intelligent? There is a grand scheme behind every war that is going on, has ever gone on, and will ever go on. These men are not unintelligent, they are sociopaths. I fail to see how thinning the heard so to speak would eliminate disease, and the like and in general make the world a better place. I'll admit, we ARE fighting over resources. Moreso because we have lost the ability to look after ourselves, or better yet, it has been taken away from us by " societies" demands. Big can of worms, better not opened.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Eugenics never goes over very well with societal ethics for very long. Eventually, those in charge will start basing it off of socioeconomic scales which will lead to selection by ethnicity. And the definition of "mental illness" can be challenged and modified to suit the needs of those in charge. For example, fundamentally religious people would fall in that category if basing it on rigid definition without context.

It is sort of why I also disagree with the whole watch list and guns proposals since there are no clearly defined and unbendable criteria to qualify a person for the list. And that criteria can always change.

I think a better approach would be deep tax cuts for those who opt to sterilize themselves and for people with high IQs (or those that do well on a humanist ethics exam) to produce at least one child.

a reply to: kumiho

IQ elitists irritate me, and I speak as someone who probably is one. I am quite Prideful. It is something I attempt to contain.
It is not a nice characteristic to express.

If I knew that the system would run flawlessly, then perhaps I would be in favor of only allowing certain people to breed. (Emphasizing kindness, gentleness, and empathy. Intelligence without care for others will only lead to horrific Dystopia.)
However, I know that it would be abused and fail in its intended goal. Thus, I do not support it.

im for population control, for reasons i dont wish to disclose, but im pretty sure it would help the advancement of the human race

originally posted by: Layaly
a reply to: DeathSlayer

At least contraception for 3rd world countries

Seriously .. we send charity to help feed starving marvins and so kids don't have to drink water they also use as toilet

Haven't we been trying this since the 80's with little to no effect with population control and disease?

I think starting in 3rd world countries with sterilization, we would see positive results within a decade.