It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Charity offers UK drug addicts £200 to be sterilised

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 04:45 PM
link   
Here we go everyone, eugenics in the open here in the UK...

It has to start somewhere, and its starting with drug addicts.

BBC - Charity offers UK drug addicts 200 quid

Once this starts, and its shown to be effective they will move onto other vulnerable members of society.




The first person in the UK to accept the cash is drug addict "John" from Leicester who says he "should never be a father".


Its been described as being ethical in that the children are not born into drug addict parents, which is correct, but I wanted to highlight that its a start, and I'm pretty sure in time this will be extended.

The bit I worry about is that most drug abusers are vulnerable people, and will do anything for their next hit. That 200 pound will come in very handy, and more than likely on that much crack they will overdose anyway, but the point being, they are vulnerable, and I hope its policed correctly.
edit on 17/10/10 by multichild because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 04:47 PM
link   
nice.. I wonder how many will fall for it. or is what they're doing moral?



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by Myendica
 


The ones who will fall for it, are any drug addicts who are looking for their next hit...

Some of the most vulnerable people in society.

This subject will now be a focal point when any person in society is either not pulling their weight, a scurge on public finances, or a problematic person withing the community.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:02 PM
link   
reply to post by multichild
 


Great find


Check this out:


Project Prevention (founded and formerly known as Children Requiring a Caring Kommunity [sic] or C.R.A.C.K.) is an American non-profit organization which also has a presence in the United Kingdom, which pays drug addicts cash for volunteering for long-term birth control, including sterilization.

Source


The irony isn't lost on me, I reckon they had a good laugh at that.

This is all very frightening though.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


Im going to say I'm slightly shocked by this...

Although as the post above says, is it moral though? This would have to be policed very well. Its not fair to dangle 200 quid in front of a drug addicts eyes, and then expect them to make a life changing decision when they need help



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


C.R.A.C.K that is crazy LOL!

How the hell could they call it that. No wonder the name of theproject changed.

You got to that very quickly, have you know about this before LiveForever8?



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by multichild
 


It s an outrage. It eugenics. targeting the most vulnerable in society, wouldn't it be more charitable to try and help these people get rehabilitation. Money is tight at the moment, a quick 200 quid for the next fix will be too appealing to the addicted. I hope there are people trying to stop this type of "Charity".



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by multichild
 



Originally posted by multichild
reply to post by LiveForever8
 


You got to that very quickly, have you know about this before LiveForever8?


Yes, I have been following this subject for some time now and it's getting crazier by the day. I mean, where does it stop? Next it will be alcoholics. Maybe criminals too. Or why not just use the term 'undesirables' and have done with it, just like the Nazis. It really is a slippery slope.

This is the exact type of thing we in the West would have condemned the likes of China for doing some 10 years ago, it would have been an outrage. Not any more, anything they can do...



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:32 PM
link   
The bit I worry about is that most drug abusers are vulnerable people, and will do anything for their next hit. That 200 pound will come in very handy, and more than likely on that much crack they will overdose anyway, but the point being, they are vulnerable

Exactly. However I have to say I don't agree with this on any level. Addicts cannot make appropriate judgements about their own well being.

Would you trust an addict to make a well balanced decision?

This also makes it seem as though once your an addict you are condemned to addiction for life. This is not true. You can overcome it. This is just an easy fix, once again we are treating 'symptoms' something which we love to do.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by multi child
 


Ok I personally think it is a good option and a very responsible way to go. It needs to get out there for many more than the drug addicts though, and just remember that if a person decides to get it together later and can afford to have a child they can get it reversed if the right procedures are offered.

Maybe a sliding scale on that one huh? The highest price for the most permanent and less money for one that can easily be reversed?

Sterilization is not a bad idea when you think about the nations starving right now and the people in utter torture to simply survive in that living hell, babies don't deserve it, and this would be a great step in a real solution to the challenges humanity faces.

It may be that genetics should also be a consideration, we can weed out mental illness, disease and poverty at the same time.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   
Whenever people seek permanent solutions to temporary problems no good ever comes of it. Drug addicts often go on to be reformed drug addicts who want, and need, families and the same motivations that the rest of us have.

Not to mention the people who will say they are druggies just to get the easy money...

Sad, pointless, misguided, and, in the end, tragic. We should be more evolved than this as a species and society.

~Heff



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
They are doing this in North Carolina too...

www.wcnc.com...



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
Eugenics> It is an idea whose time has come. It should have been done a long time ago.
What exactly is your objection to this?
Do you think that it is OK for drug addicts to have children?
And why?
Do you think that they are qualified to raise children?
A baby from a drug addicted Mother will likely be brain damaged and need special care for his/her whole life. At best the baby goes thru hell with the withdrawal problems.
That’s Ok with you?

These people who are so down that the 200 looks good to them are exactly the people we do not need in our society, and they should not be reproducing.
Sure drug abusers are vulnerable people. Why exactly do we want more of the same? Like produces like you know.

Why do any of your question the morality of this?

Multichild says: “This subject will now be a focal point when any person in society is either not pulling their weight, a scurge on public finances, or a problematic person withing the community.”

***You like having people who are perpetual burdens upon society?
Don’t you thing there are enough of them already?
Why are you shocked? You never heard of this before?

Rehab? You are kidding. How many addicts have been successfully rehabilitated and gone on to be self responsible and qualified to raise children? Bet you could count them on one hand.

Yes, criminals should be sterilized. Behavior is inherited.
Oh here we go again with the objection to sterilize “undesirables.”
How many undesirables do we need in this world?

And quit throwing out “just like the Nazis.” They patterned their program after the one in the US. Yes, the US was the FIRST to have this idea.

What exactly are you all “outraged” about?
How do you think that this will affect you?
Do you have qualms about your own desirability in society?



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by multichild
 


Isnt this basically a charities way of supporting drug cartels and dealers?

What about anyone that turns away from drugs and decides to get their life back and have a family etc?

This is insane as its not only supporting drug barons, its ruining futures!




posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
In the future the same argument of morals and ethics will be used to police the law abiding and fiscally responsible people of society.
A slippery slope indeed, on that is fraught with many side roads and sharp turn offs that lead to even greater and more deplorable acts.
While I can see the benefit in preventing children from being born into tragic circumstances, the idea of taking advantage of people through coercion is to me just as sinister as kidnapping and performing these acts against their will.
That being said...NO.. I do not have an alternative plan that would better fit the situation. I like the OP believe that if it must be implemented it should like wise be heavily policed and not allowed to overflow into other scopes of practice, where candidates are selected based on having a family history of heart disease, Diabetes, or any other undesirable trait.
Unfortunately that's not how it works, and almost as surely as I'm sitting here I know this will eventually progress into something tremendously savage and reprehensible.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:09 PM
link   
reply to post by OhZone
 



Originally posted by OhZone
Do you think that it is OK for drug addicts to have children?
And why?


Yes I do. I happen to know someone who was a drug addict in his youth (Heroin) and would have readily accepted £200 to feed his habit.

Now he has a wife, two perfectly healthy children and a steady job.


Originally posted by OhZone
Oh here we go again with the objection to sterilize “undesirables.”
How many undesirables do we need in this world?


What is your definition of 'undesirables?'


Originally posted by OhZone
And quit throwing out “just like the Nazis.” They patterned their program after the one in the US. Yes, the US was the FIRST to have this idea.


I am fully aware of that. The point I was making is that what happened in Nazi Germany is a perfect example of how this way of thinking can be devastating, especially when put into the wrong hands.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar

Sterilization is not a bad idea when you think about the nations starving right now and the people in utter torture to simply survive in that living hell, babies don't deserve it, and this would be a great step in a real solution to the challenges humanity faces.


Absolutely! I'm all for reducing the ever increasing birth rate. This country, and the world as a whole, is overpopulated. There are simply far too many people on the planet for anything like a balanced level of sustainability. Anything trying to deal with that can only be a good thing in my book.



It may be that genetics should also be a consideration, we can weed out mental illness, disease and poverty at the same time.


Why would you want to weed out mental illness? The evidence is pointing toward an epidemic of mental illness the causes of which are rooted in the pressure cooker environment engendered by the false construct of the modern world. The only way you start to tackle the mental health epidemic is by dealing with the societal and behavioural problems that are the cause of it - root and branch.



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by XXXN3O
reply to post by multichild
 


its ruining futures!


Not if it's reversible in the form of a vasectomy...



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:37 PM
link   
Big Pharma's Plan

Step 1: Create AIDS

Step 2: Create drugs to stop AIDS from killing you


Now these wonderful drug addicts wont be using condoms at all - how perfect for the spread of big pharma's plan



posted on Oct, 17 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
By "mental illness", it is meant such as heritable schizophrenia and bipolar disease.
Stress isn't inherited.

Why would anyone object to eliminating tendancies to heart disease?
Would you want to pass this onto your children?




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join