Should The Poor Be Sterilized

Look, I know this is thread is walking a very fine line, but I'm asking this question not to be mean-spirited, or racist.

But am I the only one who believes that if you can't afford to feed yourself, and the other 4 children you already have, who are straving to death as we speak, that just maybe, you shouldn't be allowed to have any more CHILDREN?!

Consider for a moment the images we are contantly confronted with in places like Africa, and other 3rd world countries. We see women with 3-4 children starving, lying flat out on their backs dying, with flies swirling about. How many notice the mothers are usually pregnant?

Then there is the genocide of millions in Rowanda, Serbia, the Congo, and Darfur. Rebel troops are routinely sent to massacre hundreds of thousands of people on the wrong side of politics, or religion. The estimate is that over 10 million people have been murdered on the continent of Africa during the last 15 years.

In Africa, death is almost a blessing, because up to 70% (Conservative) of the population in many countries have AIDS, and many of the children are born with the disease. And you have an idiot like Mugabe who believes that AIDS can be cured with vitamins and witchdoctors. Did you know that in South Africa, there are men who believe that sleeping with a virgin can cure them of AIDS?

Added to this, more than 300,000 people in Africa suffer from trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness), millions suffer from tuberculosis, pneumonia, and meningitis.

We see villages in the middle of the desert, crowed, no food, no hope of a life outside of their poverty, preyed upon by rebels, warlords, and corrupt leaders.

And the world keeps sending money - billions for the poor starving children.

Do you really believe the children are seeing any of this money?

Good lord! It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see this one folks.

You may call me cruel, or unsympathetic, but honestly, the only way to prevent these people from having more children is mandatory sterilization, because they won't stop on their own, and they won't use condoms!

There's gotta be a drug you can put in the water, or injections... whatever it takes.

What do you think?

It's unfortunate, but I agree.

The more children they have just means they need more food and money, that they don't have. They are just starting another horrible live filled with hunger and pain.

Maybe there is a chance that there may be a change and they would have better lives but it is slim.

They need to realize that it is unfair to bring another child into their life of pain. The children don't deserve it.

no
humans are not animals though we treat each other like them

I say starve the rich and feed the poor till there are no rich no more

i say we take all that money that goes to the rich bankers at the FED
every April, you know income tax and take it away from them
feed our people and demand our government print its own money

sterilize the rich

What about the people who are rich, but it is because they worked hard and were successful? Why punish them because others are less fortunate?

Some people actually worked to gain their wealth.

this is true, but i suspect the vast majority of them start out with
the playing field tilted in there favor

but you do raise a valid point, i stand somewhat corrected

Originally posted by tom_roberts
no
humans are not animals though we treat each other like them

I say starve the rich and feed the poor till there are no rich no more

i say we take all that money that goes to the rich bankers at the FED
every April, you know income tax and take it away from them
feed our people and demand our government print its own money

sterilize the rich

"Starve the rich?" Grow up! The rich run this world.

How is it treating a human being like an animal, to insure their survival?

To bring a child into this world, just to watch it suffer and die? If people can't be responsible, then why should they be allowed to be irresponcible, when human life is on the line?

I hesitate to make a blanket call on other people's lives but...........

From a personal standpoint; I would rather not be alive if I was destined to be starving, sick, stupid or ignored.


I'm not for penalizing the rich in any way, but it sure would be nice if more of the rich could be like Bill Gates, Bono, or even Don Imus.

''How is it treating a human being like an animal, to insure their survival?''

what????????

forcing people to do something they do not want is called fascism
perhaps you would be the first to volunteer

Originally posted by eyespy2
But am I the only one who believes that if you can't afford to feed yourself, and the other 4 children you already have, who are straving to death as we speak, that just maybe, you shouldn't be allowed to have any more CHILDREN?!

Our economical status is no way, shape, or form, any indication of our parenting techniques. Unfortunately, every human is born with rights and nobody has the ability to infringe on these. No matter what. Telling an individual that he/she can not reproduce because they do not make enough money, that is absolutely absurd.

I am willing to bet that there are plenty of "rich" kids that go to bed hungry as well. They may sleep in a warm bed and nice blankets, but the neglect they suffer is an equal to the cold and emptiness a child in poverty endures.

Why infringe on the impoverished?

Originally posted by eyespy2
Consider for a moment the images we are contantly confronted with in places like Africa, and other 3rd world countries. We see women with 3-4 children starving, lying flat out on their backs dying, with flies swirling about. How many notice the mothers are usually pregnant?

And how many of these children are praying for another day? They are not praying for death, they are praying for another day. Why is that? Because they appreciate what they have. It may not be everything that we have, or everything that we can offer them, but they accept their reality.

And now what do we do? We say we should sterilize them. Why? Because these commercials that show starving children are too much for us?

Originally posted by eyespy2
Then there is the genocide of millions in Rowanda, Serbia, the Congo, and Darfur. Rebel troops are routinely sent to massacre hundreds of thousands of people on the wrong side of politics, or religion. The estimate is that over 10 million people have been murdered on the continent of Africa during the last 15 years.

Very true. Places like Rhwanda, Darfur, etc., are something that horror movies are made of. Absolutely disgusting. But what does any of that have to do with the sterilization of the impoverished? Your referring to government corruption. In response to the corrupt governments, we should further punish the victims?

Originally posted by eyespy2
In Africa, death is almost a blessing, because up to 70% (Conservative) of the population in many countries have AIDS, and many of the children are born with the disease. And you have an idiot like Mugabe who believes that AIDS can be cured with vitamins and witchdoctors. Did you know that in South Africa, there are men who believe that sleeping with a virgin can cure them of AIDS?

That is your opinion. It is my opinion that we allow these individuals to determine their own future, just as we permit your to decide how you live your life. If a poor woman decides she wants to have a child, that is her right. In forty years, ask that child if he/she is glad that their "poor mother" decided to have a child, and see what their answer is.

We "assume" that we know what they want, but the truth is, we have no idea.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Added to this, more than 300,000 people in Africa suffer from trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness), millions suffer from tuberculosis, pneumonia, and meningitis.

So we are going to strip them off the one positive in their life? The love for a child is something that one can not even begin to explain. Why should the poor not be able to enjoy this? It's not enough that they live horrendous lives, we are attempting to strip them off their right to reproduce.

Some may say that they would choose death over the reality we see for these individuals. Those that would choose death, may agree that this is an appropriate course of actions. But the problem is, your speaking for other people who have a voice, and have a right to decide for themselves.

You wouldn't want people to speak for you, why should you speak for others?

Originally posted by eyespy2
We see villages in the middle of the desert, crowed, no food, no hope of a life outside of their poverty, preyed upon by rebels, warlords, and corrupt leaders.

Again, government corruption. The government has punished these individuals enough. Why are you suggesting that we further this suffering?

Originally posted by eyespy2
What do you think?

What do I think? I think your advocating genocide. I think you've schemed a plan to wipe out all of the impoverished citizens of our planet over a generation or two.

A few times in the last hundred years, the "uppity ups" of our society were brought down to the level of the "peasants". The Great Depression, World War I, and World War II are times in our own lives, or the lives of our parents, or the lives of our grand parents, when we all lived on the same economical level. We were all poor, and we all lived hard lives.

What if we sterilized everyone then? Would you be here? Would I be here?

What if you lost your job tomorrow and could no longer put food on the table? Should you be sterilized?

Genocide is wrong. Even when you put it in a nice little box with a pretty little bow.

Originally posted by enjoies05
It's unfortunate, but I agree.

The more children they have just means they need more food and money, that they don't have. They are just starting another horrible live filled with hunger and pain.

That is your opinion. Since when is money the end all/be all? Can a poor family not be happy? Do we all need six figure incomes in order to live a happy life?

As a child, I was far from rich. We made the best with what we had, and always had a meal on the table. If I wanted something, my parents would do their damnedest to get me it.

But I remember weeks at a time when food was scarce, and the nights were cold.

Did we fight during these nights? Did I wish I were dead?

No, we became closer.

Originally posted by enjoies05
They need to realize that it is unfair to bring another child into their life of pain. The children don't deserve it.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in that statement?

The child would live a tough life, so we'll just not have it. How is that in the best interest of the child? How do you, myself, or anyone else, know what is in the best interest of this child?

To protect this child from suffering, we'll just deny his/her existence right from the get go?

Originally posted by eyespy2


You may call me cruel, or unsympathetic, but honestly, the only way to prevent these people from having more children is mandatory sterilization, because they won't stop on their own, and they won't use condoms!

There's gotta be a drug you can put in the water, or injections... whatever it takes.

What do you think?

So I'm guessing that this isn't a volunteer programme...rather, it will be administered by a bunch of well-to-do white folks. Put's me in mind of a 'Modest Proposal' that the poor be fed to each other. What a freak show!!

That red neck chafin' on y'all there, Cletus?

[edit on 7-5-2007 by JohnnyCanuck]

If you are a fertile female and you seek help from the government (ie welfare) I think that the government should require that you take some sort of long term birth control.

I don't think that the government should be in the business of sterilizing people too quickly but there certainly seem to be way too many poor women who keep cranking out the babies.

I don't think that it's the responsibility of the government to pay for the cost of raising said kids.

If you are a fertile female and you seek help from the government (ie welfare) I think that the government should require that you take some sort of long term birth control.

I don't think that the government should be in the business of sterilizing people too quickly but there certainly seem to be way too many poor women who keep cranking out the babies.

I don't think that it's the responsibility of the government to pay for the cost of raising said kids.

How many of you had Daddies or Grand-daddies that fought Hitler to protect the world from programmes like Eugenics? See, there's a name for that sort of evil. Try improving their lot, instead. Funny how there's always enough money around to blow the world to hell, but never enough to provide medical care for all your citizens, or to build a well so a farmer in an impoverished area can grow enough food to feed his kids, or for a single mother to earn enough money to provide daycare and improve her lot by working? For shame.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by JohnnyCanuck]

Originally posted by tom_roberts
''How is it treating a human being like an animal, to insure their survival?''

what????????

forcing people to do something they do not want is called fascism
perhaps you would be the first to volunteer

Fascism? That's funny. You're forced to work everyday to pay your rent, eat, drive... how much money is left over? These people can't, don't work. Why because there is no work. They can't feed themselves or their children. Mugabe gave all the farm land to his relatives who're not farmers. The men, just keep screwing the women, because they have no choice. Women don't say no to men in Africa.

Many of the children are the result of rape by rebel soilders.

We're not talking about your personal view of the world, or mine for that matter. We're talking about a cruel land, that's out of controll, where one more mouth to feed means death is waiting at the door.

How many of you had Daddies or Grand-daddies that fought Hitler to protect the world from programmes like Eugenics?

It wasn't only Hitler and his crazies that supported the idea of eugenics, many of our own scientists back then and even now support it. Obviously they are not Nazis so it's not a purely Nazi trait

I do think there should be something done to deter a lot of teenage pregnancies but this society today is too intent on blaming everybody else but themselves and anyway, the state will take care of things and their right to have babies.

An example is one of my useless neighbours who last year pumped out her third. No partner / husband, doesn't work (may never have done) but is provided with a 3 bedroom apartment by the local council and claims just about everything she can. It's her right to claim for everything but do these leeches ever stop to consider where the money comes from?
I work bloody long hours and pay my way, as I always have done since leaving school at 16. It really cheeses me off seeing people who make no contribution to society talking about their rights, like we all owe them something, so they can just sit around pumping out more kids so they can claim even more benefits. Sure, have kids if you can support them but not if you can't, it's a simple matter of responsibility.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

If you are a fertile female and you seek help from the government (ie welfare) I think that the government should require that you take some sort of long term birth control.

I don't think that the government should be in the business of sterilizing people too quickly but there certainly seem to be way too many poor women who keep cranking out the babies.

I don't think that it's the responsibility of the government to pay for the cost of raising said kids.

How many of you had Daddies or Grand-daddies that fought Hitler to protect the world from programmes like Eugenics? See, there's a name for that sort of evil. Try improving their lot, instead. Funny how there's always enough money around to blow the world to hell, but never enough to provide medical care for all your citizens, or to build a well so a farmer in an impoverished area can grow enough food to feed his kids, or for a single mother to earn enough money to provide daycare and improve her lot by working? For shame.

[edit on 7-5-2007 by JohnnyCanuck]

Billions upon billions of dollars have flowed into Africa trying to improve the lot of these people, just to be stollen by warlords, and evil dictators. It is impossible to improve the lot of about 50 million Africans living in squallor, filth, and abject poverty without the slightest hope of improving their "Lot in life" because their current systems of government don't want them to.

Their governments want them poor, and starving, and on the nightly news, so they can get more money out of suckers willing to give it up.

And don't start your crying about how we should do something about it.

We're not talking about America, where everyone can work for a living! All that rah, rah B.S. doesn't buy a cup of rice in Africa. Yet they keep producing one baby after another, one more mouth to feed.

In the Congo, there have been reports for years of how rebel soldiers have turned to canibalism...

www.guardian.co.uk...

What will you say when you learn that dying children represent a source of meat for starving families?

I say, "for shame on you" for bringing your eltitist concept of right and wrong to a situation that requires more than your Polly Anna view of how the world truly is.

Originally posted by Wildbob77
If you are a fertile female and you seek help from the government (ie welfare) I think that the government should require that you take some sort of long term birth control.

I don't think that the government should be in the business of sterilizing people too quickly but there certainly seem to be way too many poor women who keep cranking out the babies.

I don't think that it's the responsibility of the government to pay for the cost of raising said kids.

We're talking about Africa, not the US or other civilized nations. The governments of the congo, darfur, rowanda, etc., do not pay one single dime to raise the children of these poor people. Instead they send out rebels to murder them.

Originally posted by tom_roberts
I say starve the rich and feed the poor till there are no rich no more
sterilize the rich

Starve and punish those who work hard and earn money ...
yeah, that makes sense.

Originally posted by Britguy
It wasn't only Hitler and his crazies that supported the idea of eugenics...

You are right, it wasn't. Anyone remember the name MARGARET SANGER?
The godess of planned parenthood. If you want a spooooky bedtime story some night ... go read what she had to say. YIKES!

Originally posted by eyespy2
And the world keeps sending money - billions for the poor starving children.

Which - from a practical perspective - interferes with natural selection.

From a strictly practical perspective you are right Britguy .. the poor should be sterilized. However, we are not a 'strictly practical' species. We all have GOD GIVEN rights, and one of those rights is to procreate.

You would hope that common sense would tell people who can't afford children to stop popping them out ... just to watch them die painful premature deaths. Since they can't see that (see .. natural selection has been interfered with and our species has been dumbed down) then EDUCATION is what has to happen. Education as to why they shouldn't be having more and more children and education as to what wil happen to them all when they are born. There are very good inroads to birth control gettting to third world places .. the people just have to be educated to use it.

Folks always ask how a civilised people like the Germans could have countenenced the evils wrought by their government. They must have been complicit, we are told, bcause these things just don't occur out of a vacuum. Even today, we are still discovering the price that the German people had to pay for 'allowing' evil to arise in their midst...things like tens of thousands being deliberately starved by the Allied Occupation...but a price had to be paid.

If there was complicity, it can be found in a lack of willingness to fight the institutionalised degradation of other people. When the lives of another people become less deserving of the rights and privileges with which you endow your own...well, you're on the way. How was it that they described the proceedings at Nuremberg? 'The banality of evil'?

I have nothing more to add to this thread, cuz I'm not here to change your mind...I'm just trying to make you aware of what you're actually saying.

Originally posted by chissler

Originally posted by enjoies05
It's unfortunate, but I agree.

The more children they have just means they need more food and money, that they don't have. They are just starting another horrible live filled with hunger and pain.

That is your opinion. Since when is money the end all/be all? Can a poor family not be happy? Do we all need six figure incomes in order to live a happy life?

As a child, I was far from rich. We made the best with what we had, and always had a meal on the table. If I wanted something, my parents would do their damnedest to get me it.

But I remember weeks at a time when food was scarce, and the nights were cold.

Did we fight during these nights? Did I wish I were dead?

No, we became closer.

Originally posted by enjoies05
They need to realize that it is unfair to bring another child into their life of pain. The children don't deserve it.

Do you not see the hypocrisy in that statement?

The child would live a tough life, so we'll just not have it. How is that in the best interest of the child? How do you, myself, or anyone else, know what is in the best interest of this child?

To protect this child from suffering, we'll just deny his/her existence right from the get go?

You just don't get it, Chissler,

If you were born in America or any other civilized country on the face of this earth, no matter how poor you were, your family had at least one thing... hope! In America there is always a way.

In Africa, please. When you're living in the middle of a desert, surrounded by nothing, but sand. There are no jobs, or food, unless the government has pitty and allows some of the food to arrive on trucks, that was brought for with some of the billons we sent them.

No jobs, no food, no life = no hope.

Ask the 250,000 people in darfur who were murdered over night by government sponsered rebels about hope. Oh, you can't because they're dead!

Sterilization of women with one child would give them hope of perhaps raising one child to the age of 15 - 20 years old.

It is absolutely ignorant to bring 4 children into a desert of hopelessness, only to see them starve to death before your eyes.