Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Female inmates sterilized in California prisons without approval

page: 3
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus


but boncho
my parents were quite "sane"
especially dad [being a sociopath ]
if we did things "your" way I would not be here to point out your [and others ]moral deficiency as regards the subject, would i now?

oh wait...

 


Your dad wanted a vasectomy?
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by FatherStacks


If an inmate has 5-7 children and is still a repeat offender, how does sterilizing mom help the innocent children she already has? What is the point that beyond which a criminal is having too many children? Three? Four? Who decides that? Incompetent parenting happens in all socioeconomic levels, so why not go after the white collar inmates? What sorts of crimes qualify you for targeted sterilization? I understand, but not necessarily agree with, the argument that this reduces the burden placed on states for welfare assistance, but this is a really blurry and dangerous area to be heading (IMO).

 


I will be the first to say that the 'justice' system in Western nations needs reform. US has more people incarcerated than anywhere in the world (Per capita). Hell, it houses 20% of prisoners, of the entire world...


At year-end 2007 the United States had less than 5% of the world's population[31] and 23.4% of the world's prison and jail population (adult inmates).[9]


Those are staggering numbers.

BUT:

No matter what system of government it is. A socialist one, democracy, authoritarian, feudal, etc... If someone is popping out kids like kitty litters and doesn't take care of them, I see nothing wrong with giving mothers or fathers the option of having their tubes tied or vas deferens snipped.

In some cases it should be mandatory.

How many baby moms must a guy have or how many underweight uncared for babies must a crap mother have, before someone steps in to fix the major problems they are creating with their irresponsibility?



but boncho
my parents were quite "sane"
especially dad [being a sociopath ]
if we did things "your" way I would not be here to point out your [and others ]moral deficiency as regards the subject, or the immorality of of holding the children morally responsible for their parents being scum [ a la original sin] would i now?


oh wait...



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus


but boncho
my parents were quite "sane"
especially dad [being a sociopath ]
if we did things "your" way I would not be here to point out your [and others ]moral deficiency as regards the subject, or the immorality of of holding the children morally responsible for their parents being scum [ a la original sin] would i now?

oh wait...

 


If say a limit on kids being born was made to people who could adequately take care of the ones they had, you would argue that if that were in place you might not be born? The same could be argued that people like Osama Bin Laden wouldn't be born. He was born to the tenth wife of his father.

Maybe it's not even about taking care of your kids, maybe its about underlying jealousy and rage, etc. Hard to get daddy and mommy's love when you have to compete with 19 other kids.

One could also argue, that for every 100 neglected kids born, perhaps if they weren't someone who was looking to care for their kids might have had some instead, but they didn't because they were murdered by a neglected one who turned to crime.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I fail to see your point here.
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


Limiting the number of children people have doesn't seem like something evil to me. Maybe the way you go about it could be (China is not a good example), but we have a population problem. And we have a number of issues related to unwanted, unloved kids.
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:10 PM
link   
I have no problem with forced sterilization of female inmates the are in prison for abuse of there children or the have continued use illegal drugs while pregnant.

On these cases though the sterilization should be ether ordered by the court or approved by a judge



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:11 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 



go back to the beginning and read all those posts being made by "people" who are "good" with this, or better yet, read the comments on the source article. including one saying "lets forget about ethics for a minute " [which is precisely what those who performed those sterilizations did, and those who "see no evil" may be deficient of ] then there are the fools who believe they'll be paying less taxes if "useless eaters" are eliminated, never mind that they themselves are considered such by those behind this. there's your proof of the 1st part of my statement.


How are these comments PROOF that eugenicists still exist? These are opinions; we all have an opinion. I support these procedure, too. Does that make me a eugenicist?




being in prison it's quite easy to get a prisoner's signature for something or other, throw away all but the last page, wherein said signature is written and append a sterilization agreement, or otherwise falsify a signature, never mind that obvious pressure was applied, it should never have been brought up in the 1st place.

and it's a sure bet that money was a motivation.
I think they simply saw a problem, found a solution and offered the procedure. Face it, repeat offenders who spend their lives in jail certainly aren’t responsible guardians. The state was doing them and tax payers a favor by offering the procedure IMO.




but I agree with you, that some "people" need to be killed.

alas, PRISM and T&C keep me from elaborating...

No elaboration needed….I get it.





you've often admitted you've made your own mistakes, regarding decisions
hmmm?

so judge not, buddy.
that is beneath you

I’m not judging. These women made the decision voluntarily and I support it. I view sterilization as contraception, so I don’t have a problem with it at all. I haven’t seen any evidence that there was anything wrong here other than apparently they failed to get proper authorization. There was certainly no type of social engineering going on to purify the population or something.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by TheMagus


but boncho
my parents were quite "sane"
especially dad [being a sociopath ]
if we did things "your" way I would not be here to point out your [and others ]moral deficiency as regards the subject, would i now?

oh wait...

 


Your dad wanted a vasectomy?
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


umm no

[I'm sure a lot of "people" would have wanted to do the honors]

did you confuse the shillax with the chillax again ?



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANNED
I have no problem with forced sterilization of female inmates the are in prison for abuse of there children or the have continued use illegal drugs while pregnant.

On these cases though the sterilization should be ether ordered by the court or approved by a judge


So you don't believe child abusers have Constitutional rights?

A person cannot waive their Constitutional rights by committing acts we disagree with. There is a proper punishment associated with every crime but forced sterilization is barbaric and intrusive IMO. I don't think we should give TPTB any more power than they've already stolen from us.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:27 PM
link   
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


Ok guys...I might may sound like an ogre....but honestly, these are the same women having MANY welfare babies, and also filling our prison systems because they obviously don't know how to act right, thus cant and wont, teach their MANY offspring either.

I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

It is a fact that many of these same people come from a long line of the same activities, thus it is either genetic, and their line needs to be severed, or it is taught, because nobody in their family knows, thus cant teach, the way to act right.

Either way, I say good idea, take these losers out of the gene pool for good, then the rest of our lines can go on without having to spend time money or lose loved ones at the hands of these "useless" excuses for humanity.


Not saying I am right, just adding my 2 cents.......



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


Who cares what it sounds like?
You have valid points.



I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

They would die off more quickly if we didn't reward them for being stupid/lazy.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Kind of off topic a bit, BUT I actually wouldn't have a problem with the sterilization of individuals that had a long history of getting into trouble/drug addiction. These people cannot take care of themselves so I don't think we should allow them to reproduce and be a burden on the state.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by inverslyproportional
 


Who cares what it sounds like?
You have valid points.



I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

They would die off more quickly if we didn't reward them for being stupid/lazy.


I totally agree!!!

I have 3 kids, I work 7 days on 1 day off, every week, I do all that I can to teach my kids what is right and wrong, I barely even have time to post on ATS at present because of my work schedule and responsibilities outside of work.

I have never been arrested, I don't break the law, I pay my bills, I work quite hard to do so.

It is not a comparison between those "like" me, and any other "normal" person.

It is a comparison between me and the lowest of the low, those that think drinking and driving is ok, robbery is ok, selling drugs is ok.

This is not even a comparison IMHO, I am a honest hardworking human, that tries my hardest to do right at all times.

Others couldn't care who they hurt, or what the cost to others, as long as "they" get what "they" want..........WTF!!!!!!?????

These idiots all need to go, so that my kids, who have no problems working for a dollar, and are never any trouble at all to others, can live a good life, and have other "good" children of their own, in a safe world.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by RalagaNarHallas
reply to post by LABTECH767
 


i looked and could not find a link that said that reproduction is a human right but if you got a link ill be glad to look at it,i have to walk my dogs so ill be back to the thread in about 20-30 minutes but thank you for your reply


en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
rhrealitycheck.org...
members.tripod.com...

And there are many other pages that indicate that this breaches the intent of the international human rights law and there is sufficient to bring a case of a breach of human rights'.

Here is an area that needs revision.
dawn.thot.net...



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 06:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag

Originally posted by ANNED
I have no problem with forced sterilization of female inmates the are in prison for abuse of there children or the have continued use illegal drugs while pregnant.

On these cases though the sterilization should be ether ordered by the court or approved by a judge


So you don't believe child abusers have Constitutional rights?

A person cannot waive their Constitutional rights by committing acts we disagree with. There is a proper punishment associated with every crime but forced sterilization is barbaric and intrusive IMO. I don't think we should give TPTB any more power than they've already stolen from us.


I don't honestly know where the "line" is for me between my response and your statement, but yours are words of wisdom.

I have read the entire thread, and I have to say, I agree with all you have said, though at times to a greater or lesser extent.

Good show as usual Seabag!!!



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by boncho
reply to post by TheMagus


but boncho
my parents were quite "sane"
especially dad [being a sociopath ]
if we did things "your" way I would not be here to point out your [and others ]moral deficiency as regards the subject, or the immorality of of holding the children morally responsible for their parents being scum [ a la original sin] would i now?

oh wait...

 


If say a limit on kids being born was made to people who could adequately take care of the ones they had, you would argue that if that were in place you might not be born? The same could be argued that people like Osama Bin Laden wouldn't be born. He was born to the tenth wife of his father.

Maybe it's not even about taking care of your kids, maybe its about underlying jealousy and rage, etc. Hard to get daddy and mommy's love when you have to compete with 19 other kids.

One could also argue, that for every 100 neglected kids born, perhaps if they weren't someone who was looking to care for their kids might have had some instead, but they didn't because they were murdered by a neglected one who turned to crime.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

I fail to see your point here.
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


Limiting the number of children people have doesn't seem like something evil to me. Maybe the way you go about it could be (China is not a good example), but we have a population problem. And we have a number of issues related to unwanted, unloved kids.
edit on 7-7-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)


"good" points, [I'll ignore you're mistaken belief that there are too many people on the planet, psychopaths and eugenicists excepted] but may I be so bold as to suggest that:


It is not your place to be making such choices for others




For the most part there is a select crowd that is targeted for forced sterilizations. If the country is working under a eugenics program, the poor, minorities, epileptics, manic-depressives, prostitutes, alcoholics, homeless, and criminals are the targets (Piotrowski, 2000). Often when the country is supporting a population control program, the poor and illiterate are the targets (Sims, 1998).
www2.webster.edu...
careful now, as a self confessed former member of one of the above mentioned targeted minorities
there but for the grace of god go you.

getting the point now friend?



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by TheMagus
 



go back to the beginning and read all those posts being made by "people" who are "good" with this, or better yet, read the comments on the source article. including one saying "lets forget about ethics for a minute " [which is precisely what those who performed those sterilizations did, and those who "see no evil" may be deficient of ] then there are the fools who believe they'll be paying less taxes if "useless eaters" are eliminated, never mind that they themselves are considered such by those behind this. there's your proof of the 1st part of my statement.


1-How are these comments PROOF that eugenicists still exist? These are opinions; we all have an opinion. I support these procedure, too. 2- Does that make me a eugenicist?




being in prison it's quite easy to get a prisoner's signature for something or other, throw away all but the last page, wherein said signature is written and append a sterilization agreement, or otherwise falsify a signature, never mind that obvious pressure was applied, it should never have been brought up in the 1st place.

and it's a sure bet that money was a motivation.
I think they simply saw a problem, found a solution and offered the procedure. Face it, repeat offenders who spend their lives in jail certainly aren’t responsible guardians. The state was doing them and tax payers a favor by offering the procedure IMO.




but I agree with you, that some "people" need to be killed.

alas, PRISM and T&C keep me from elaborating...

No elaboration needed….I get it.





you've often admitted you've made your own mistakes, regarding decisions
hmmm?

so judge not, buddy.
that is beneath you

3-I’m not judging. These women made the decision voluntarily and I support it. 4-I view sterilization as contraception, so I don’t have a problem with it at all. I haven’t seen any evidence that there was anything wrong here other than apparently they failed to get proper authorization. There was certainly no type of social engineering going on to purify the population or something.



1- not all, only those that approve forced
note how some go to the extreme of recommending exporting forced sterilization
to other countries. it all about getting rid of the competition just another pillar of the Imperialists
[semi-related] www.abovetopsecret.com...
2- see 1
3- very little that occurs in prison is voluntary.
that certain interests in the state of cali created their own fund, to get past a federal prohibition
[and a very rare good one]
doesn't tell you something?

4-well and good, it is an option for people who are voluntarily making responsible reproductive choices
problem is most people lack the necessary information and thanks to the fundies, education.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


Ok guys...I might may sound like an ogre....but honestly, these are the same women having MANY welfare babies, and also filling our prison systems because they obviously don't know how to act right, thus cant and wont, teach their MANY offspring either.

I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

It is a fact that many of these same people come from a long line of the same activities, thus it is either genetic, and their line needs to be severed, or it is taught, because nobody in their family knows, thus cant teach, the way to act right.

Either way, I say good idea, take these losers out of the gene pool for good, then the rest of our lines can go on without having to spend time money or lose loved ones at the hands of these "useless" excuses for humanity.


Not saying I am right, just adding my 2 cents.......


you'll sing another tune when you're declared obsolete



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:20 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMagus
 


The population curve:



Population vs. Oil production (discovery):



We're running out of everything. (Global resource supply)

Look at the massive bell curve regarding population, and compare it to the discovery of oil. Now take into account that we are mining, drilling and processing fuel supplies now we never would have touched in the future. Because resources are growing scarce.

It is only a mater of time before resources can not keep up with population demands and then no one will be "choosing" they will be forced into their position by ignorance of action (or inaction).

So, yes, education, guidance, etc. Might save us from a future where people are drowning their own babies because everyone is on rations.




"good" points, [I'll ignore you're mistaken belief that there are too many people on the planet, psychopaths and eugenicists excepted] but may I be so bold as to suggest that:

It is not your place to be making such choices for others



So who's choice is it to have 10 kids and not take care of them? It's the choice of the children or the parent. (Using the latter term loosely there.)

Does society have to clean up after the choices of other people?

If we make a conscience effort now to reduce our numbers so they are sustainable, so we avoid some very ugly truths in the future, we are making an effort to preserve balance.

Because past population control involved some very ugly Eugenics, does not mean the future of it has to.


For the most part there is a select crowd that is targeted for forced sterilizations. If the country is working under a eugenics program, the poor, minorities, epileptics, manic-depressives, prostitutes, alcoholics, homeless, and criminals are the targets (Piotrowski, 2000). Often when the country is supporting a population control program, the poor and illiterate are the targets (Sims, 1998).
www2.webster.edu...
careful now, as a self confessed former member of one of the above mentioned targeted minorities
there but for the grace of god go you.

getting the point now friend?


Your studies might be from the turn of the millennium but they are based on stuff that's 60-100 years old. Nice try.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by TheMagus

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


Ok guys...I might may sound like an ogre....but honestly, these are the same women having MANY welfare babies, and also filling our prison systems because they obviously don't know how to act right, thus cant and wont, teach their MANY offspring either.

I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

It is a fact that many of these same people come from a long line of the same activities, thus it is either genetic, and their line needs to be severed, or it is taught, because nobody in their family knows, thus cant teach, the way to act right.

Either way, I say good idea, take these losers out of the gene pool for good, then the rest of our lines can go on without having to spend time money or lose loved ones at the hands of these "useless" excuses for humanity.


Not saying I am right, just adding my 2 cents.......


you'll sing another tune when you're declared obsolete


LOL...for what exactly???? Working hard, raising "good" young lives and following the law???

Ya that's what all these women had in common with me alright.



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 07:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by inverslyproportional

Originally posted by TheMagus

Originally posted by inverslyproportional
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 


Ok guys...I might may sound like an ogre....but honestly, these are the same women having MANY welfare babies, and also filling our prison systems because they obviously don't know how to act right, thus cant and wont, teach their MANY offspring either.

I say let all the idiots die off, thus the rest of us "useful" folks can get on with it, without having to worry about being car jacked or robbed.

It is a fact that many of these same people come from a long line of the same activities, thus it is either genetic, and their line needs to be severed, or it is taught, because nobody in their family knows, thus cant teach, the way to act right.

Either way, I say good idea, take these losers out of the gene pool for good, then the rest of our lines can go on without having to spend time money or lose loved ones at the hands of these "useless" excuses for humanity.


Not saying I am right, just adding my 2 cents.......


you'll sing another tune when you're declared obsolete


LOL...for what exactly???? Working hard, raising "good" young lives and following the law???

Ya that's what all these women had in common with me alright.


perhaps for inability to follow instructions [as in watching a video or following a provided link]
or do you consider a librarian a "useless eater"? [as you'd know if you had watched]

how about when you're too old to work and become a non-productive "useless old coot"?
from eugenics to euthanasia there's no distance at all.
but keep promoting it, so long as you avoid hypocrisy and you're consistent

ogre.
***********************
reply to post by boncho
 





edit on 7-7-2013 by TheMagus because: added edit & comment



posted on Jul, 7 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by RalagaNarHallas
 





or belonged to socially disadvantaged groups living on the margins of society


This caused chills in me.





new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join