PDA

View Full Version : Bribing addicts to get sterilized



Jason McCullough
09-09-2003, 09:23 AM
Talk about your horrible conflict (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3189763.stm). Is this coercion, or just the exercise of an individual right, subject to financial incentives? She obviously has bad intentions:


As it has expanded, the tone of the group has also shifted. Ms Harris, who was quoted in one of her first interviews as saying "We don't allow dogs to breed. We spay them. We neuter them. We try to keep them from having unwanted puppies, and yet these women are literally having litters of children," has since toned down her language.

Toddy
09-09-2003, 10:11 AM
Why exactly is that comment bad? It seems remarkably honest, the sort of thing we've all said at one time or another, seeing impoverished mothers with whole litters of kids they can't afford to feed. All the money in the world given to various social programs has done nothing to curb this problem, which we all subsidize. I'm not comfortable with offering permanent sterilization, though removable IUDs seem like a fantastic idea to me. It's certainly more realistic than the current philosophy, summed up by that insane "many drug addicts become loving mothers and that their children in many cases do not suffer life-long health problems" line in the linked article.

Jason McCullough
09-09-2003, 10:12 AM
Because it's a rephrased version of the eugenics talk from the 30s? This is one of the few occasions where bringing up Hitler isn't irrelevant; the Nazi's got their eugenics plans from the US's small versions.

Comparing drug addicts to dogs.....

Brian Koontz
09-09-2003, 10:14 AM
Are you aware that you are the precise type of person for whom Political Correctness was invented, Jason?

Political Correctness has not simply made things more polite... its made the truth far more concealed. So now everything has to be translated into English because it was translated in the first place away from clear English and into a polite, mangled form.

Every phrase becomes a euphemistic jungle, every word a hiding place.

When you fear others, Political Correctness is the logical solution...

Machfive
09-09-2003, 10:45 AM
I think offering money to have people sterilize themselves presents plenty of moral quandries, but as far as I'm concerned, it's ethical.

It worked for Singapore.

Shawn Metcalf
09-09-2003, 11:02 AM
I've heard CRACK's founder speak on the radio about her organization. Her intentions seem legit to me; she has adopted four children who were born addicted to crack, so I'd say she cares about this issue beyond just wanting to get some people sterilized.

Her main failing (last time I looked into this) seems to be a lack of understanding how controversial something like this would be. The Washington City Paper had a great article a few years back where a reporter followed around a person from CRACK's DC chapter. Seeing this person just randomly approach (apparent) drug users and try to strike up conversations about sterilization showed how unprepared this group was to get across what has got to be a pretty tough sell.

voltaic
09-09-2003, 11:34 AM
Because it's a rephrased version of the eugenics talk from the 30s? This is one of the few occasions where bringing up Hitler isn't irrelevant; the Nazi's got their eugenics plans from the US's small versions.
You mean "...from England's small versions". Can't blame Bush this time, dude. 60+ years difference AND wrong continent.

Midnight Son
09-09-2003, 11:49 AM
Imagine how many of ya'll wouldn't be here if they sterilized pot smokers in the 60's and 70's. :lol:

Jason McCullough
09-09-2003, 12:35 PM
Because it's a rephrased version of the eugenics talk from the 30s? This is one of the few occasions where bringing up Hitler isn't irrelevant; the Nazi's got their eugenics plans from the US's small versions.
You mean "...from England's small versions". Can't blame Bush this time, dude. 60+ years difference AND wrong continent.

I didn't say Bush. I meant this (http://www.hartford-hwp.com/archives/45/034.html).


Virtually all eugenicists supported compulsory sterilization for the unfit; some supported castration. By 1936, when expert medical panels in both England and the US finally condemned compulsory eugenical sterilization, more than 20,000 forced sterilizations had been performed, mostly on poor people (and disproportionately on black people) confined to state-run mental hospitals and residential facilities for the mentally retarded. Almost 500 men and women had died from the surgery. The American Eugenics Society had hoped, in time, to sterilize one-tenth of the US population, or millions of Americans. Based on the American eugenical sterilization experience, Hitler’s sterilization program managed to sterilize 225,000 people in less than three years.

Anyway, since its not the government doing it, it's legal, but extremely disturbing.

Jason McCullough
09-09-2003, 12:35 PM
Dup.

Lizard_King
09-09-2003, 01:04 PM
Sounds pretty passable to me, at least in the short run. Wouldn't it be great if this really caught on, and years from now it was found that people who didn't want to have children were becoming drug addicts for the free sterilization + money?

TimElhajj
09-09-2003, 01:26 PM
Sounds pretty passable to me, at least in the short run. Wouldn't it be great if this really caught on, and years from now it was found that people who didn't want to have children were becoming drug addicts for the free sterilization + money?

We'll just have to offer them straight up drugs for sterilization.

Lizard_King
09-09-2003, 01:29 PM
Sounds pretty passable to me, at least in the short run. Wouldn't it be great if this really caught on, and years from now it was found that people who didn't want to have children were becoming drug addicts for the free sterilization + money?

We'll just have to offer them straight up drugs for sterilization.

What do you mean "them"? Gimme that crackpipe...

Jason McCullough
09-09-2003, 01:41 PM
So no one would object if, say, a group started bribing gun owners to not have kids?

Midnight Son
09-09-2003, 01:46 PM
Hmmmm, we could bribe right-wing nuts to shut up? Only problem with that is their greed, so no amount would be enough.....

Peter Frazier
09-09-2003, 02:26 PM
If they're stupid enough to take the money, they shouldn't be reproducing anyway.

Lizard_King
09-09-2003, 02:45 PM
So no one would object if, say, a group started bribing gun owners to not have kids?

I certainly wouldn't. Good luck, though, and if people like you think gun owners are as detrimental to society as drug addicts, then we must be doing something right.

XPav
09-09-2003, 03:03 PM
Since the 2nd Amendment was written in the late 1700s, I propose that the only weapons that private citizens can carry are those that were available in the late 1700s.

Once we confiscate all other handguns and automatic weapons, the gang-bangers weapons of choice will be a standard flintlock modified into a 1860-era percussion cap rifle. These of course, will be illegal.

Citizens requiring greater protection in their house will be allowed to deploy Revolutionary War era field artillery pieces, so long as all members of the household are trained as a gun crew.

Lizard_King
09-09-2003, 03:08 PM
Since the 2nd Amendment was written in the late 1700s, I propose that the only weapons that private citizens can carry are those that were available in the late 1700s.

Once we confiscate all other handguns and automatic weapons, the gang-bangers weapons of choice will be a standard flintlock modified into a 1860-era percussion cap rifle. These of course, will be illegal.

Citizens requiring greater protection in their house will be allowed to deploy Revolutionary War era field artillery pieces, so long as all members of the household are trained as a gun crew.

That's sound thinking. Since the first amendment and any others implying a right to free thought were written at that time as well, I propose we consider any conventionalized morality since then an abuse of the original document. Goodbye, Bay Area, so long, Greenwich Village...we'll miss you.

XPav
09-09-2003, 03:16 PM
That's sound thinking. Since the first amendment and any others implying a right to free thought were written at that time as well, I propose we consider any conventionalized morality since then an abuse of the original document. Goodbye, Bay Area, so long, Greenwich Village...we'll miss you.

Maybe housing prices will come down then and I can get something more than an apartment.

Lizard_King
09-09-2003, 03:31 PM
Maybe housing prices will come down then and I can get something more than an apartment.

The new paradigm in trading liberty for security: trading liberty for cheap rent. I bet you can get at least a Democratic nomination out of that.

Rywill
09-09-2003, 03:32 PM
Maybe housing prices will come down then and I can get something more than an apartment.
If money's really that tight, go get sterilized, dummy.

XPav
09-09-2003, 03:33 PM
Maybe housing prices will come down then and I can get something more than an apartment.

The new paradigm in trading liberty for security: trading liberty for cheap rent. I bet you can get at least a Democratic nomination out of that.

Maybe we can legislate a sense of humor too.

Midnight Son
09-09-2003, 03:35 PM
Zer iss no place in the Vaterland, er... Homeland, for humor! Humor is a sign of a miscegenated dying race!! Next, ve invade Canada!

bmulligan
09-09-2003, 05:50 PM
Hmmmm, we could bribe right-wing nuts to shut up? Only problem with that is their greed, so no amount would be enough.....

You're right, we've already been bribing left-wing nuts to shut up for decades, but they still won't shut up.

Midnight Son
09-09-2003, 05:54 PM
Zer iss no place in the Vaterland, er... Homeland, for humor! Humor is a sign of a miscegenated dying race!! Next, ve invade Canada!

Reposted for your edification, home-slice.

Machfive
09-09-2003, 08:04 PM
Since the 2nd Amendment was written in the late 1700s, I propose that the only weapons that private citizens can carry are those that were available in the late 1700s.

Once we confiscate all other handguns and automatic weapons, the gang-bangers weapons of choice will be a standard flintlock modified into a 1860-era percussion cap rifle. These of course, will be illegal.

Citizens requiring greater protection in their house will be allowed to deploy Revolutionary War era field artillery pieces, so long as all members of the household are trained as a gun crew.

Since the First Amendment was written in the 1700's, we're going to need to confiscate all personal computers, cell phones, phones, and any other device which allows one to exercise their free speech which wasn't invented prior to 1776.

The only items which will be legal are and protected by the 1st Amendment are quill pens and 18th century manual printing presses.

This also goes for religions. Any religion which did not exist prior to the creation of the constitution would not be offered the same protection as those which did.

I could go on an on, but your argument is a poor one.

bmulligan
09-09-2003, 08:04 PM
sorry for my feeble attempt at humor as well. It wasn't personal. It was my way of putting down republicans for thinking they can act like democrats and it always comes back and bites them in the ass.

XPav
09-09-2003, 09:46 PM
I could go on an on, but your argument is a poor one.

No no, please do. Its just more proof that we need to legislate a sense of humor, like I already said once.

Machfive
09-09-2003, 09:52 PM
Jesus christ. HUMOR HAS NO PLACE IN POLITICS.

And when it ends up there anyways, the least you could do is put a smiley on there.

Some of us are kinda retarded and don't do well with subtleties like that.

Brad Grenz
09-09-2003, 11:43 PM
So no one would object if, say, a group started bribing gun owners to not have kids?

Did you miss the word "compulsory" in your quote above? As long as it isn;t that you should probably shut the fuck up. You're ok with 13 year old girls making the choice to have an abortion, something they may come to regret later in life, but a 25 year old crack head can't choose to have a free hysterectomy? Everything that makes your middleclass-white-man's-guilt radar act up insn't automatically evil. I'm tired of you posting crap like this and saying it makes you "uncomfortable".

And if licensed gun owners kept having children born really sick from the mother's exposure to gunsmoke, you might be able to find support for your program. As it is you might as well redonate your funds to something worthwhile.

Machfive
09-10-2003, 12:11 AM
I glossed over "compulsory" myself.

Although I haven't given the topic enough serious thought to have made a decision one way or another, one must take a serious look at what Singapore did with eugenics. Their program was totally voluntary, and if my memory serves me, they essentially paid a large sum of cash to anyone who wanted to be sterilized.

By no coincidence, those people tended to be the ones in the worst financial situations, the poor, the weary, the downtrodden. They happily took their money though, and went on with their sterile lives, while those who were middle and upper class and felt like popping out babies did so at their leisure.

Two generations later, they have one of the lowest levels of poverty in the world, along with the largest percentage of middle class. It's certainly an example worth considering, even though the word Eugenics always trips my "Hitler" flag and sends shudders down my spine with its connotations.

Chris Nahr
09-10-2003, 12:38 AM
The only items which will be legal are and protected by the 1st Amendment are quill pens and 18th century manual printing presses.

That's a fantastic idea that would dramatically improve the quality of writing in books and newspapers!

hermyhermit
09-10-2003, 05:14 AM
Everything that makes your middleclass-white-man's-guilt radar act up insn't automatically evil.

You nailed it perfectly. I'm also guessing he has so much love for all these underpriveleged people but has never met one much less set foot within 1000 yards of a ghetto.

People tend to stay away from Bad Places(tm) like that. Liberals are so sensitive and concerned about people who hate their guts. I witnessed a very funny exchange once at the DC Jail that could have been Jason McCullough and his friends.

If you remember a few years back the IMF/Worldbank had their meetings in Washington DC. Well of course the wacky left descended on the capital with a veritable army of McCulloughs bitching about the lending practices of these organizations to 2nd and 3rd world countries. Anyhow, long story short, we ended up having to lock up a BUNCH of white boys/girls that night. Way more than usual.

So these ultra left leaning pasty people with their social awareness ended up shoulder to shoulder with the people they really cared about. What ensued next was something I should have filmed because it would have made tons of money as a comedy/documentary.

About 80% of these white folks were of the "on the bandwagon type" which means they have only a foggy notion of what their causes are and since its uber hip and cool to be an activist even if you have no fucking idea what IMF stands for or what your cause is you go out have a few hits from the bong and get active... or something.

This group was like deer in the headlights. Scared shitless after being processed, stripped naked, deloused, and then thrown into ratty ass DC Jail jumpers. By the time they got to the holding cell they were pissing down their leg. All the impoverished people they cared so much about were scaring the shit out of them, and rightly so. I could go into detail but it would take a while, suffice to say it was hilarious and ironic to see these J.Crew Activists peeing their pants in fear of the very people they claim to care so much about.

The other 20% of these people were the real dyed in the wool tree hugger types. They did much better, trying to educate the brothas about social issues they weren't scared of the population at jail but at the same time it was like ships passing in the night.

One conversation really struck me and I'd never forget it. It went like this:

Homeboy: "Instead of this IMF bullshit, why don't you protest the motherfuckin ghetto."

Pale Activist: "We are concerned about all poverty and the black condition in America too!"

Homeboy: "Then why none of ya'll come down and bring us food and shit? Ya'll say ya'll care but you motherfuckers scared to come into the hood."

Pale Activist: "No that isn't it at all. We just try to enact social justice from the top down by protesting to the people who make the laws and policies."

Homeboy: "Like I said, ya'll niggers scared to come down. Ain't nothin' gonna change 'til all you concerned white folk come walk in the ghetto."

Pale Activist: "We work with organizations that provide aid..."

Homeboy: "Naw we need WHITE boys in the hood so then all them senators and shit would care. Bunch of niggers get wet up they don't care but let some white motherfuckers get shot at and then it make the news, but ya'll too scared to come down."

Pale Activist: Silence....


I just found that dialogue really amusing. Liberals love causes but the ones that I have met seem to have very limited experience with said causes and the actual people at the root of them. It is so easy to talk like an expert about these things when you have no fucking exposure to them isn't it?


**back on topic**

And as for forced sterilization: I'm all for it, but not for drug addicts. 2 people should be given forced sterilization immediately when meeting certain criteria.

Welfare mothers and chronic aborters.

If a woman has 2 kids while on welfare after the birth of the second child she should be automatically in reception of a tubal ligation, no questions asked. If you were irresponsible enough to get pregnant twice while you are living on the public's dime you deserve nothing more.

If the same woman has an abortion more than twice the day she walks into the doctor's office for a 3rd: tubal ligation. If you are irresponsible enough to use abortion as your chosen method of contraception you too get the prize of the inability to breed.

Midnight Son
09-10-2003, 09:36 AM
Um, word!

Lizard_King
09-10-2003, 11:31 AM
So no one would object if, say, a group started bribing gun owners to not have kids?

Did you miss the word "compulsory" in your quote above? As long as it isn;t that you should probably shut the fuck up. You're ok with 13 year old girls making the choice to have an abortion, something they may come to regret later in life, but a 25 year old crack head can't choose to have a free hysterectomy? Everything that makes your middleclass-white-man's-guilt radar act up insn't automatically evil. I'm tired of you posting crap like this and saying it makes you "uncomfortable".

And if licensed gun owners kept having children born really sick from the mother's exposure to gunsmoke, you might be able to find support for your program. As it is you might as well redonate your funds to something worthwhile.

Game, set, and match. Nothing to see here, please move along. :)

Jason McCullough
09-10-2003, 12:09 PM
LK, I wouldn't care as much if the people being bribed weren't dirt poor and in desperate situations. It's like offering a starving man a sandwich for his kidney - it's voluntary, but the whole context stinks.

Machfive
09-10-2003, 01:18 PM
But where did this veneration of childbirth come from, I missed that meeting, I tell you that. "Oh, childbirth is such a miracle, it’s such a miracle."

Wrong.

No more of a miracle than eating food and a turd coming out of your ass. You know what a miracle is? A miracle is raising a kid who doesn’t talk in a fucking movie theatre, there’s your goddamned miracle. If it were a miracle, then not every nine months any yin-yang in that world can drop a litter of these mewling fucking cabbages on the planet, and in case you have not checked the single mom statistics lately - the miracle is spreading like fucking wildfire.

Hallelujah!

Trailer parks, all over America, filling up with little miracles. THUNK. THUNK. THUNK. "Look at all my little miracles." THUNK. THUNK. "Filling up my trailer like a sardine can." THUNK. THUNK. "You know what’d be a real miracle, if I could remember your daddy’s name, goddamn it." THUNK. "I guess I’ll have to call you Trucker Jr. That’s all I remember about your daddy, was his fuzzy little pot-belly riding on top of me, shooting his caffeine-ridden semen into my belly, to produce my little water-head miracle baby-child." THUNK. "There’s your brother, Pizza Boy Delivery Jr." THUNK. "There’s your other brother, Exterminator Jr." THUNK. "There’s your other brother, ‘Will Work For Food Jr.’"

Bill Hicks was about as liberal as they come, but something tells me he'd support a program of money for sterilization.

Lizard_King
09-10-2003, 01:31 PM
LK, I wouldn't care as much if the people being bribed weren't dirt poor and in desperate situations. It's like offering a starving man a sandwich for his kidney - it's voluntary, but the whole context stinks.

The flip side to that is that it is at least as bad to patronize the poor by assuming their decisions are being made at some subhuman level. It isn't pretty, I'll agree, and wouldn't last five minutes in the US on a Singapore scale as a result of the inevitable racial politics that arise in these things, but it is not unethical.

Jason McCullough
09-10-2003, 01:39 PM
Dude, it is in the US.

Lizard_King
09-10-2003, 01:52 PM
Dude, it is in the US.

It isn't pretty, I'll agree, and wouldn't last five minutes in the US on a Singapore scale as a result of the inevitable racial politics that arise in these things, but it is not unethical.

Dude, I know. And dude, that's why I said it in the context of a national state-funded program. Mmmkay?

Jason McCullough
09-10-2003, 02:10 PM
Oh, the sentence was confusing.

Lizard_King
09-10-2003, 02:35 PM
Oh, the sentence was confusing.
My bad, then.

Brad Grenz
09-10-2003, 09:20 PM
LK, I wouldn't care as much if the people being bribed weren't dirt poor and in desperate situations. It's like offering a starving man a sandwich for his kidney - it's voluntary, but the whole context stinks.

No, it's like offering a starving man a sandwich not to wire his mouth shut. And that's not even a good analogy because drug addicts having crack babies don't just make the mother's life harder, they put an uneccisary burden on society, and do permenent harm to a defenseless child.

voltaic
09-10-2003, 11:33 PM
We'll just throw them into State-funded care centers Brad. It has obviously worked so well up to this point. :wink: