Should society consider mandatory sterilization?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

They already did.

8 Shocking Facts About Sterilization in U.S. History

A recent report from the Center for Investigative Studies has shed light on the practice of female sterilization in a California prison during a period of four years (2006-2010). According to pundit Shanzeh Khurram, "at least 148 women at the California Institution for Women in Corona and Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla received tubal ligation, a surgical procedure for permanent sterilization in which a woman's fallopian tubes are closed."

Despite the fact that the practice is illegal, inmates were coerced into these invasive procedures by doctors who failed to explain the medical intricacies of the surgeries they were about to undergo. Although it is acceptable to use state money for this procedure in California, each surgery requires medical oversight by a review committee, something that did not happen during those four years.

The blatant disregard for the reproductive rights of women in order to achieve measures of population control is inherent in the history of female reproductive health in the United States. Though sometimes deemed necessary in order to achieve a desired population balance, the history of this practice in the United States has disproportionately affected women of color and lower class women.

I don't know about you. But I am against all forms of coercion and mandatory actions. If anyone wants to force other people to sterilize, they should start with themselves first.

a reply to: intrptr

Wait, incest isn't already illegal?
Huh...

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Should society consider mandatory sterilization?

No. I'm not even going to address in detail whether the programme would be right or wrong - personally I believe it would be wrong, but I don't need to address it further. My objection is much more simple.

If you give a government a list, they will look for ways to put you on it. It is the nature of lists that they need to be filled, and it is the nature of government to fill lists. Getting onto the list will be arbitrary and capricious, getting off the list will be next to impossible.

In fact, I mention governments, but I extend this to anyone who finds themselves in a position of authority over others.

The only stage at which any check or balance can exist, is at the moment of the list's creation. Once you have taken people past the stage where they can prevent it being created, there is no more control. Any law limiting it can be tweaked, any regulations adjusted under the battle cry of "common sense" and "it's only reasonable".

So, I object on the basis that I do not trust any organisation, whether public or private, with the power of managing a list that could have serious effects on the lives of the people who are on it.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: DeathSlayer

If you do not wish this to be a discussion of IQ-based eugenics, do not make this the third line in your opening paragraph.

Stop passing on genetic code that produces lower IQ people?

I am arguing that someone's intelligence is primarily based on their upbringing and environment, with genetics having a relatively minor effect.

You can not prove this. This is speculation only. Of course the upbringing and environment effects the child but there is plenty of proof of children coming from poor conditions that were not stupid.

Not bragging but I came from a poor family and today I have a healthy business making good money and my childhood surroundings did not effect my outcome.

There are many smart people who are poor. This world is not fair and we all do not get the same opportunities in life and that has nothing to do with low IQ people or people with bad genetics.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

We all know there is no equality in society. Such a utopian thought. As for my great grandchild ending world poverty...how would I ever know? According to the eugenic terms you laid out my daughter through no fault of her own or mine would be steralized because she has cerebral palsy. My son's likely would as well because their father has schizophrenia. You cannot,nor society cannot,nor the science of eugenics cannot predict who will be the catalyst to change the world. Just ask Stephen Hawking.

One of the first major laws passed by the Nazi regime in 1934 was the forced sterilization program of those with hereditary illnesses. This program was intended to develop eventually into a full-scale program of euthanasia for those judged “unworthy of life,” especially the mentally and physically disabled. To prepare public opinion in greater Germany, a systematic and widespread propaganda campaign was put into effect to provide the scientific and political rationale for these proposals and to build support among the public at large.

Eugenics was firmly established in both the United States and in Europe as a science that claimed to find mental and physical illness to be hereditary and considered certain undesirable anti-social behavior patternsas capable of being passed from one generation to the next. As early as 1920 Karl Binding, a legal specialist, and Alfred Hoche, a psychiatry professor, had published an influential book entitled Permission for the Destruction of Unworthy Life. Hoche in particular advocated the idea of an organic state that must amputate any useless or diseased limb in order to assure the survival of the body politic. A series of training films were produced to indoctrinate medical personnel.

In other words, undesirable physical traits was but a stepping stone to undesirable political traits.

PDF, Sterilization, Euthenasia and Propaganda

a reply to: DeathSlayer

You can not prove this. This is speculation only. Of course the upbringing and environment effects the child but there is plenty of proof of children coming from poor conditions that were not stupid.

I do not need to prove this, it has already been done. The accepted ratio is 70:30, Environment:Genetics.
Of course, there will be outliers. There are always outliers.

Not bragging but I came from a poor family and today I have a healthy business making good money and my childhood surroundings did not effect my outcome.

There are many smart people who are poor. This world is not fair and we all do not get the same opportunities in life and that has nothing to do with low IQ people or people with bad genetics.

Wait, why are we talking about material wealth now? I thought this was a discussion about intelligence.

originally posted by: TheBandit795
a reply to: DeathSlayer

They already did.

8 Shocking Facts About Sterilization in U.S. History

A recent report from the Center for Investigative Studies has shed light on the practice of female sterilization in a California prison during a period of four years (2006-2010). According to pundit Shanzeh Khurram, "at least 148 women at the California Institution for Women in Corona and Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla received tubal ligation, a surgical procedure for permanent sterilization in which a woman's fallopian tubes are closed."

Despite the fact that the practice is illegal, inmates were coerced into these invasive procedures by doctors who failed to explain the medical intricacies of the surgeries they were about to undergo. Although it is acceptable to use state money for this procedure in California, each surgery requires medical oversight by a review committee, something that did not happen during those four years.

The blatant disregard for the reproductive rights of women in order to achieve measures of population control is inherent in the history of female reproductive health in the United States. Though sometimes deemed necessary in order to achieve a desired population balance, the history of this practice in the United States has disproportionately affected women of color and lower class women.

I don't know about you. But I am against all forms of coercion and mandatory actions. If anyone wants to force other people to sterilize, they should start with themselves first.

Again not done on a world wide scale but only in prison and only for a limited amount of years (4 years) and we do not know the criteria used to determine sterilization. Not only that but it can be done chemically without surgery so there must have been another agenda at hand.

50 million people dies from the result of WW II and the world agreed to fight to get rid of two dictators and the end result is we are getting ready for WW III so the 50 million that died was for no good reason as war and sickness continues.....

I wonder what would have happened if we had sterilized 50 million people back in 1930's how life would be today? AND we would NOT had killed those 50 million people....they would have lived out their lives.......

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: intrptr

Wait, incest isn't already illegal?
Huh…

Tell that to "the Royals", lol.

I agree with your point of view in this thread so far.

a reply to: intrptr

I was thinking of immediate family incest (brother-sister) rather than extended family incest (cousins.)

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Did you read the rest of the article?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Satoshi Kanazawa, the LSE psychologist behind the research, discussed the findings that maternal urges drop by 25% with every extra 15 IQ points in his book The Intelligence Paradox.

In the opening paragraph of the chapter titled "Why intelligent people are the ultimate losers in life", he makes his feelings about voluntary childlessness very clear: If any value is deeply evolutionarily familiar, it is reproductive success.

If any value is truly unnatural, if there is one thing that humans (and all other species in nature) are decisively not designed for, it is voluntary childlessness. All living organisms in nature, including humans, are evolutionarily designed to reproduce. Reproductive success is the ultimate end of all biological existence.

www.theguardian.com...


I loved the beginning

It seems that women these days are too clever for their own good, at least when it comes to making babies. Research emerging from the London School of Economics examining the links between intelligence and maternal urges in women claims that more of the former means less of the latter.

In an ideal world, such findings might be interpreted as smart women making smart choices, but instead it seems that this research is just adding fuel to the argument that women who don't have children, regardless of the reason, are not just selfish losers but dumb ones as well.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

I wonder what would have happened if we had sterilized 50 million people back in 1930's how life would be today? AND we would NOT had killed those 50 million people….they would have lived out their lives…….

Thats exactly what Hitler tried to do.

It begins in the name of helping, fixing, improving, but becomes inordinately expensive per case to surgically sterilize tens of millions (if thats what you are proposing). Even bullets became too expensive, thats why they built death camps.

Their goal all along was carefully hidden, the Nazis wanted only pure white Aryans to remain, a notion lost on the Nazi hierarchy, Hitler and his close cronies weren't pure or Aryan.

The whole notion of better than is delusional, pride driven, megalomania.

originally posted by: Eilasvaleleyn
a reply to: intrptr

I was thinking of immediate family incest (brother-sister) rather than extended family incest (cousins.)

Me too. And parents that abuse their kids. Then theres pedophiles, they don't care about the law either, carefully hiding their activity behind closed doors.

IOW, these kinds of behavior are already frowned upon if not outright illegal and impossible to 'regulate', let alone discover.

The population of the US and some European countries is starting to drop. We are doing a good enough job killing off our people by using food chemistry, such a good job that countries are letting in more immigrants to hide the fact. The native population of the US is going down but the figures show an increase. This is because of immigration.

How many people do you know who can't have kids and have to adopt? There weren't nearly as many couples who couldn't have kids in the old days. There were some that didn't want kids, there were some who never wanted to get married, but usually if they wanted kids they could at least get pregnant even if the kids did not survive. The birth control policy does reduce unwanted pregnancies and society education is also helping but there is more to this. We should be able to have healthy kids if we want to later on, that is not happening. The answer is in our food chemistry somewhere. I know ways that a person could safely reduce births, I learned it randomly in research. The body reuptakes the nutrients and the egg and sperm do not form. I would think this way of birth control would work, and getting us to eat this chemistry is being promoted. But this is reversible as soon as the chemistry is dropped and not as good a guarantee as birth control pills.

a reply to: intrptr

I think there has been a mis -translation of the word Aryan somewhere along the propaganda material, Hitler quotation of the word Aryan has been taken out of context, but by all means if "Supremacy white" feels appropriate, go ahead..

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?

If that us the criteria, you first.

Really, is this some kind of a joke thread? You sat down at the computer and decided to talk about why you like Eugenics?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Overpopulation occurs in third world countries with low levels of birth control. Most 1st world countries have stable birth rates.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Suppose that's what GM foodstuffs are all about, possibly retarding our reproductive processes never mind a whole lot of other nasty possibility's.

End of the day should we continue to breed at the level we are doing all we will achieve is to bring about the demise of the current society.

Need to ether get the hell off this rock called Earth and on to greener pastures or start eating Soylent Green.