-
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.
Should poor people be mandatorily sterilized?
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
StageLeft
No Lifer
I'd have to think more on the actual cutoff, but I think that if you're on welfare and you keep continually cranking out kids then yes you should have your tubes tied, for good measure. You're doing an injustice to yourself and society.
Something we can all agree upon. A permanent sterilization is risky, but a temporary one I could go for. Maybe a 2 year one.
gistech1978
Diamond Member
should rich people be forced into having kids?
you make 6 figures and you are childless. should the government take your wife and fertilize her eggs forcibly?
you make 6 figures and you are childless. should the government take your wife and fertilize her eggs forcibly?
Amused
Elite Member
Such is the problem with any and all socialist programs. What was once charity becomes an entitlement, and is ripe for abuse.
Because of the equal protection clause, the government cannot deny anyone access to these programs, thus they become an entitlement rather than charity.
let me make my point very clear.
I am all for welfare reform. It is a government construct, and it is the the root cause of the problem, (although the problem has yet to be clearly identified by the OP, all I see is somone who thinks too many babies is a bad thing, that's a different discussion).
The problems, once identified, should be fixed in the legislation and reform of the broken system. Not this fasscist BS of messing up people becuase they didn't turn out from your government program the way you expected.
When the government starts mandating physical procedures on the bodies of individuals (at the very least) for non-medical purposes, it is wrong. wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Is that clear?
I am all for welfare reform. It is a government construct, and it is the the root cause of the problem, (although the problem has yet to be clearly identified by the OP, all I see is somone who thinks too many babies is a bad thing, that's a different discussion).
The problems, once identified, should be fixed in the legislation and reform of the broken system. Not this fasscist BS of messing up people becuase they didn't turn out from your government program the way you expected.
When the government starts mandating physical procedures on the bodies of individuals (at the very least) for non-medical purposes, it is wrong. wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. Is that clear?
Amused
Elite Member
Ummmm... howabout the right to procreate? howabout not have your body violated by government mandate? What kind of commie-nazi are you? Can someone please bury this troll?[/quote]
They don't have to accept welfare. That is their choice.[/quote]
Actually, because welfare is an entitlement rather than true charity the government's hands are tied. If they can do this to welfare recipients, they can do it to anyone.
At any rate, the whole idea is repugnant and reeks far too much of Eugenics.
Just end welfare altogether. No one was starving in the streets prior to the mid 60s when welfare was created as part of LBJ's vastly failed "Great Society" socialist program. (Welfare was billed as the program to "end poverty once and for all"... HA!!!) Charity filled the needs of those down on their luck and had no problem forcing the lazy to work. The government, under equal protection, cannot make these distinctions.
SoylentGreen
Diamond Member
SagaLore, I'm really getting sick of reading your left-wing bullcrap.
I would actually advocate steralizing everyone at birth, that way no accidents happen ever. If you want to have a kid, then you would need a procedure done that costs $500 or $1000 or so. I don't think that you should have a kid if you can't afford the $500 or $1000 to get that procedure.
SoylentGreen
Diamond Member
Sagalore, I'd love to introduce you to my good friend sarcasm.
left-wing? I think this is waay farther off the chart than that. This is sadistic egomania of "i think i can solve the world's problems" bullcrap that too many people exhibit on these forums. Stop thinking about crap coupled with how smart you think you are, and go out there and make a difference, and maybe you'll salvage you're petty existence.
They don't have to accept welfare. That is their choice.[/quote]
Actually, because welfare is an entitlement rather than true charity the government's hands are tied. If they can do this to welfare recipients, they can do it to anyone.
At any rate, the whole idea is repugnant and reeks far too much of Eugenics.
Just end welfare altogether. No one was starving in the streets prior to the mid 60s when welfare was created as part of LBJ's vastly failed "Great Society" socialist program. (Welfare was billed as the program to "end poverty once and for all"... HA!!!) Charity filled the needs of those down on their luck and had no problem forcing the lazy to work. The government, under equal protection, cannot make these distinctions.[/quote]
This sounds like a good idea (if 100% true, though I doubt you'd stretch anything) but what would happen to people who hit hard times (laid off, etc). Are they screwed if they didn't make the decision to save for hard times? Or go to charity to eat?
Twerpzilla
Member
This whole debate brings to mind the old saying, "Scum alsways rises to the top". While responable citizens tend to have small families, where they will be able to provide forthere children in accordance with there income, poor people seem to have a breeders mentality.
Why poor people are poor, and the mentality behind there socio-economic place in society is a cool topic of discusion, which segways into the baby mill thing.
Are poor people apt to be less responsable in general? Maybe they suffer from mental issues, such as low self worth, and think there salvation, there purpose in life is to have children. Even though they are not financialy or emotionaly well equiped to be parents.
If we addressed some of the social issues in this country that make/keep people poor, in the long term we may have a healthier society. Short term it would seem to make sense to help people that are not finacialy or emotionaly able to raise children from placing burdens upon themselves.
Rather, teach those that are able to be taught how to expend there personal resources on understanding who they are, how they can become a good person, a productive member of society, to have pride, feel self worth. Maybe than they could put themselves in a position where they are able to support children, to have children, and are able to make the decision to have only as many kids as they are able to care for.
No real answers, but some thoughts to build on.
Why poor people are poor, and the mentality behind there socio-economic place in society is a cool topic of discusion, which segways into the baby mill thing.
Are poor people apt to be less responsable in general? Maybe they suffer from mental issues, such as low self worth, and think there salvation, there purpose in life is to have children. Even though they are not financialy or emotionaly well equiped to be parents.
If we addressed some of the social issues in this country that make/keep people poor, in the long term we may have a healthier society. Short term it would seem to make sense to help people that are not finacialy or emotionaly able to raise children from placing burdens upon themselves.
Rather, teach those that are able to be taught how to expend there personal resources on understanding who they are, how they can become a good person, a productive member of society, to have pride, feel self worth. Maybe than they could put themselves in a position where they are able to support children, to have children, and are able to make the decision to have only as many kids as they are able to care for.
No real answers, but some thoughts to build on.
Vic
Elite Member
This thread (and many others just like it Text) is proof that Democratic Socialism is the worst and most evil tyranny of all.
That people can even discuss these types of things, stealing children from parents or mandatory sterilization, without even realizing how evil and wrong they are... well, it chills my blood.
Wasn't socialism conceived out of love and compassion for your fellow citizen? Think about the plight of the poor? The suffering children? So we created a system in which we left the path of voluntary charity and set up mandatory welfare. And look where we're at... kill them, steal their children, sterilize them, hate the poor that burden us... and it's a beautiful day.
Of course, the solution is to scrap these socialist schemes. Obviously, they do not work. But socialists are like addicts in denial. The failure of their system simply means that more injustices most be committed, more atrocities... no individual may stand in the way of the common good!
My only hope is that this madness ends soon, and we return to the real love and real compassion of respecting the individual.
That people can even discuss these types of things, stealing children from parents or mandatory sterilization, without even realizing how evil and wrong they are... well, it chills my blood.
Wasn't socialism conceived out of love and compassion for your fellow citizen? Think about the plight of the poor? The suffering children? So we created a system in which we left the path of voluntary charity and set up mandatory welfare. And look where we're at... kill them, steal their children, sterilize them, hate the poor that burden us... and it's a beautiful day.
Of course, the solution is to scrap these socialist schemes. Obviously, they do not work. But socialists are like addicts in denial. The failure of their system simply means that more injustices most be committed, more atrocities... no individual may stand in the way of the common good!
My only hope is that this madness ends soon, and we return to the real love and real compassion of respecting the individual.
Amused
Elite Member
Actually, because welfare is an entitlement rather than true charity the government's hands are tied. If they can do this to welfare recipients, they can do it to anyone.
At any rate, the whole idea is repugnant and reeks far too much of Eugenics.
Just end welfare altogether. No one was starving in the streets prior to the mid 60s when welfare was created as part of LBJ's vastly failed "Great Society" socialist program. (Welfare was billed as the program to "end poverty once and for all"... HA!!!) Charity filled the needs of those down on their luck and had no problem forcing the lazy to work. The government, under equal protection, cannot make these distinctions.[/quote]
This sounds like a good idea (if 100% true, though I doubt you'd stretch anything) but what would happen to people who hit hard times (laid off, etc). Are they screwed if they didn't make the decision to save for hard times? Or go to charity to eat?[/quote]
As I said, people down on their luck relied on family and friends first, then charity. There is no reason why what worked then will not work now.
Welfare was billed as a way to END poverty, not keep people from starving in the streets, because NO ONE WAS starving in the streets. In reality, all welfare did was create generational poverty and a sense of entitlement rather than responsibility.
Amused
Elite Member
Actually, since welfare was created crime INCREASED, not decreased. Check the crime rates before the mid 60s, and after.
No one was starving in the streets before welfare. The crime rate was lower before welfare.
Welfare's main selling point was it was a means to "end poverty once and for all." It failed. All it did was create generational dependancy.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
