I look at it as paving the way for the NEXT load...

 

Are you saying I've got a low sperm count?

 

Here you go:

And I should amend this before someone jumps in to twist it around. When I say 'criminal past', it just means within say the last 2 years. After being convicted and serving time, lets say there is a 2 year probationary period before the procedure is reversed. And if it was reversed, you fuck up and wind up back in prison or in rehab, the procedure is done again for another probationary period. If you had a kid in the mean time, then we do what we already do with social services and the like.

And yes, I would still support those two in the article getting sterilized because as heartwarming as the story is, it goes the other way much more often.

-S-

 

Hardly murder....it's effective contraception..... which I'm obviously in favour of......I just think enforced sterilization is going too far.

 

So am I....because, you have mentioned that the cycle just gets repeated and the 4 year old is going to end up with the same mentality as his parents when he gets older.....so it's not a bullshit question at all.

And think about Dubya's previous penchant for copious amounts of alcohol......which is on record.

 

Preventing kids from having kids and preventing those most unable to care for kids by simply making it impossible for them to have kids is a far better method than crossing your fingers and hoping they do right by their child(ren). It certainly doesn't eliminate risk, people are still people, but it goes a long way in helping ensure a decent quality of life so we don't have children left in bathroom stalls anymore or babies that are stillborn because it's mother was an alcoholic.

-S-

 

But who is to say the requirements for sterilization wouldn't change say perhaps if someone were a Christian or? I am sure there would be lots of people who would be in favor of that.

*GULP*

 

I didn't say mentality. What I meant by cycle was the child is extremely likely to inherit his or her parents socio-economic status.

And as I just explained, this is not designed to eliminate human stupidity, just help to prevent massive amounts of suffering, child abuse, neglect and murder.

-S-

 

Or Japanese-Americans! *gasp*

 

My 'plan' has nothing to do with religiousness or beliefs, only the ability for the prospective parent to provide care to their child(ren).

-S-

 

I'm all in favour of that as a concept too but it's widely held as an idea that people respond better to encouragement rather than force.

 

that's complete bullshit

Who are you to determine what parents will do that to their kids? Who are you to determine who will be fit parents? Who are you to determine who procreates and who doesn't?

Fact is, you're full of shit, and thinking like yours should be gotten rid of, because it spreads like disease to anybody who buys into it

 

Really? I'd beg to differ...

 

How's that working so far?

-S-

 

One usually goes hand in hand with the other.

Carrot....or stick?

 

I know that, Shake...but 'plans' often change according to who is in power at the time.

 

okay shake, so now this is probably the biggest ass i've seen you make of yourself. Who gets to decide who is forcibly sterilized and who isn't? a board of self-righteous ignorant people like yourself? and what if they can't agree, majority rules over whether or not she or he can have a child? and where does the line stop? what if the board decides that ALL blacks or ALL Hispanics can't have children? they have the power right? they can FORCE sterilization, set up all the restraints you want but it is a huge possibility and you cannot deny that. Also, lets just take a look back at who else has attempted to use forced sterilization, i think they were Nazis, who forcibly sterilized. They thought they were doing the right thing, just like you think because your head is stuck so far up your own ass that your sucking your tonsils. nobody has the right to stop anybody from reproducing, if they do and the child is growing up in an unsafe environment, BY ALL MEANS take the kid away, but you can't make a judgment on who is worthy and who isn't, you're just power hungry is what i think, you're an atheist because you don't want to think that anybody is more righteous then you, all heil shake eh? you sicken me worse than this one rare case does. Please, shut your mouth.
thank you for your time

 

Judging by the numbers in prison, and those not.....I'd say reasonably well....although not perfectly. There's room for improvement.

 

You're not welcome for my time, you just wasted it.

If you had read and understood what I wrote above, you would have seen that we already have a system in place deciding who is fit and unfit. The same people that come in and say you are an unfit parent, we are taking your child from you, can operate this system as well. You have someone before you who wants to have a kid. If you have your little magic time machine and you look in to the future and you see that you will be walking through his/her living room door in 5 years and taking that kid away because they are exactly the same now as they will be then, why not just deny them the right to have the child? If they aren't responsible enough to keep a child, why should they be allowed to have another one as soon as you take the first one away? You haven't done anything to help the situation, only enabled them to make it worse.

-S-

 

Whether or not you disagree with him, he's only trying to suggest a viable answer to very complex, long-standing social problems. There's no need to get so nasty SM.