• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

can state-forced sterilizations be a good thing?

dolph

Diamond Member
oregon governer apologizes for past state practice

SALEM, Ore. (AP) - Gov. John Kitzhaber formally apologized Monday for Oregon's past eugenics law that led to the forced sterilization of hundreds of people.

Girls in reform school, people in mental institutions and poor women selected by welfare workers were among the more than 2,500 Oregonians subjected to sterilizations under a law that stood from 1917 to 1983.

"To those who suffered, I say the people of Oregon are sorry," Kitzhaber said during a ceremony in the governor's office. "Our hearts are heavy for the pain you endured."

He is the second governor to atone for state eugenics laws after Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, who also erected a memorial in May to the first woman sterilized under the policy.

Among the dozens of people who crowded into Kitzhaber's office for Monday's ceremony was Velma Haynes, 68, who was sterilized at age 15 while living at the Fairview Training Center, a state-run institution for the mentally ill and retarded.

Haynes called the state's acknowledgment of wrongdoing "long overdue," but praised Kitzhaber's effort to make things right.

"I want to thank you for taking the time to apologize," Haynes told the governor. "Your apology is appreciated and accepted."

Not everyone was satisfied. Ken Newman, 61, who said he was given a vasectomy without his consent when he was a teen living at Fairview, said the governor's remarks don't erase what happened.

"I want more than an apology. I want to be compensated," Newman said. The law was based on the pseudoscientific movement that sought to prevent people considered "unfit" or "defective" from having children. After 1967, the Oregon law was chiefly used to sterilize those with mental illness or mental disability.


can eugenics (the study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding) be good overall when practiced by the state?
 
Originally posted by: dolph
oregon governer apologizes for past state practice

SALEM, Ore. (AP) - Gov. John Kitzhaber formally apologized Monday for Oregon's past eugenics law that led to the forced sterilization of hundreds of people.

Girls in reform school, people in mental institutions and poor women selected by welfare workers were among the more than 2,500 Oregonians subjected to sterilizations under a law that stood from 1917 to 1983.

"To those who suffered, I say the people of Oregon are sorry," Kitzhaber said during a ceremony in the governor's office. "Our hearts are heavy for the pain you endured."

He is the second governor to atone for state eugenics laws after Virginia Gov. Mark Warner, who also erected a memorial in May to the first woman sterilized under the policy.

Among the dozens of people who crowded into Kitzhaber's office for Monday's ceremony was Velma Haynes, 68, who was sterilized at age 15 while living at the Fairview Training Center, a state-run institution for the mentally ill and retarded.

Haynes called the state's acknowledgment of wrongdoing "long overdue," but praised Kitzhaber's effort to make things right.

"I want to thank you for taking the time to apologize," Haynes told the governor. "Your apology is appreciated and accepted."

Not everyone was satisfied. Ken Newman, 61, who said he was given a vasectomy without his consent when he was a teen living at Fairview, said the governor's remarks don't erase what happened.

"I want more than an apology. I want to be compensated," Newman said. The law was based on the pseudoscientific movement that sought to prevent people considered "unfit" or "defective" from having children. After 1967, the Oregon law was chiefly used to sterilize those with mental illness or mental disability.


can eugenics (the study of hereditary improvement of the human race by controlled selective breeding) be good overall when practiced by the state?

WTF? He should voluntarily castrate himself.
 
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?
 
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys

lol Way to go.
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys

Here comes the Right...
 
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys


gopunk in 2004.
 
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys

Here comes the Right...
Why should my taxes pay for her to breed like a bunny on viagra?

But how about this: anyone on welfare gets a reversible contraceptive implant that can be removed as soon as they get off welfare?

 
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
Originally posted by: her209
Originally posted by: gopunk
Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
The government has no right to forcefully sterilize anyone.

It isn't that I don't think some people shouldn't be sterilized, but who is going to be the picker and chooser? And who is going to oversee that person (agency) to be sure they don't abuse their power?

i'd be happy to take the job.... seriously 😛

welfare mother with 5 kids and going.... load 'er up boys

Here comes the Right...
Why should my taxes pay for her to breed like a bunny on viagra?

But how about this: anyone on welfare gets a reversible contraceptive implant that can be removed as soon as they get off welfare?


Norplant seems like a good choice for welfare mothers...shame there is no implantable male birth control....
 
There was a thread here a while back about male birth control. If they can figure out pills for that I'm sure there's gonna be some Norplant-like drug shortly thereafter.
 
I sometime feel some people shouldn't be allowed to have choice, because of their poor decision making. But, taking away someone choice is taking away my own rights, therefore everyone should be allow to make their own decision and caution our over zealous need of control over our world.

Just to let you know that Vietnamese were consider inferior & not intelligent by the Chinese/Japanese since history begin, and specially during the great WW. But, that theory was proven wrong because there are greater demographic of Vietnamese that are educated white collar worker than Vietnamese blue collar worker compare to White American, Hispanic, African, or Chinese/Japanese.

It goes to show that any race, red/black/brown/yellow/white can be just as intelligent & productive citizen.

This eugenic idea isn?t going to work, because it will lead to abuse. It is better to police oneself than letting the state doing it for you.

Which country pioneered forced sterilization in the 20th century, Germany or the United States of America? The German program began in January 1934, but the U.S. state of Indiana passed a forced sterilization law (for mental defectives) in 1907 (when Adolf Hitler was 18 years old). Before the German program began, at least seventeen U.S. states (including California) had 'forced sterilization' laws. Before 1930 there were 200-600 forced sterilizations per year (in the U.S.A.) but in the 1930s the rate jumped to 2,000-4,000 per year. (1)

Margaret Sanger, Sterilization, and the Swastika

Mad In America.

"A History of the American Eugenics Society,"

In the 1930's, the Nazis introduced a massive, compulsory sterilization of a large segment of the German population.

Mandatory Sterilization for Black Youth

The Ethnic Cleansing Agenda

How Psychiatry Lit the Racial Fires

Population Control, Nazis, and the U.N!
 
I sometime feel some people shouldn't be allowed to have choice, because of their poor decision making. But, taking away someone choice is taking away my own rights, therefore everyone should be allow to make their own decision and caution our over zealous need of control over our world.
But someone who is on welfare has admitted that they can't be responsible for themself and needs the state to take care of them. The same with someone committed to a mental institution.

In those cases, doesn't a temporary and reversible revocation of the right to breed seem reasonable? Once these people are able to care for themselves again then they deserve to make their own choices.
 
Here comes the Right...

i'm not right-winged by any stretch of the imagination. i just think it's ridiculous that people keep on having children when it is clear they can not provide for them.

my mom tells me that power corrupts, but i dunno. i think i can do it (be just and fair) 😛
 
it's funny to joke about cutting some people off (pun intended), but in practise, i can't imagine a more horrible thing for the goverment to do.
 
ah , eugenics... it was huge here, back in the day. if it was around now it would be that hootie guy who gets snipped...
 
Back
Top