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.
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...
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...
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.
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.
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.
but I agree with you, that some "people" need to be killed.
alas, PRISM and T&C keep me from elaborating...
you've often admitted you've made your own mistakes, regarding decisions
hmmm?
so judge not, buddy.
that is beneath you
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)
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
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.
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.
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
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.
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)
It is not your place to be making such choices for others
www2.webster.edu...
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).
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?
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.
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.
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.
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.......
"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
www2.webster.edu...
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).
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
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.
or belonged to socially disadvantaged groups living on the margins of society