Quote :

"I say offer money to viable women/men between a certain age to be sterilized. I mean do you think that some crack head or prostitute wants a baby...odds are no. And have them be the reversible kind as well ie tubes tied or vasectomy. So if Person A was in a position where they didn't want a kid but could use an extra 300 bucks, then let them get sterilized. Now suppose Person A, in the future, manages to get his/her life together and wants to start a family, they can pay to have the procedure reversed. If the person can't pay for it, then most likely they're not in a position where they could financially take care of the kid anyways."

5/6/2007 4:59:17 PM

to be honest, I see nothing wrong with that, except for certain people such as Jessie saying that we're trying to get rid of lower income blacks, etc etc etc

5/6/2007 6:52:36 PM

look at you fucktards having a discussion about

Quote :

"reproduction liscense"

that just sums it all up right there.

5/6/2007 7:41:22 PM

we should just let the poor sell off their children.

5/6/2007 7:45:37 PM

How is my idea letting the poor sell their children?

5/6/2007 7:50:56 PM

it's not, but that's the next logical step.

5/6/2007 8:15:44 PM

not really. If someone wants to give up their ability to have children for a little bit of cash, do those people really need to be having babies anyways?

5/6/2007 8:21:40 PM

Quote :

"And have them be the reversible kind as well ie tubes tied or vasectomy."

According to my father, who is an ob/gyn doctor, these procedures are not reversible. I can't see why this is so, and it's entirely possible he misunderstood me and was talking about hysterectomies and salpingo-oophorectomies. But according to him this isn't something you can just go in and reverse.

5/6/2007 8:59:15 PM

they are although the success rates are not that high. Vasectomies are getting alot better though due to better surgical equipment

5/6/2007 9:11:20 PM

Quote :

" sylvershadow makes hitler HAPPY!"

nastoute ftw.

this kind of thinking is inevitable with government handouts, this is the one of the biggest dangers of more government in our lives. When the government gives people money then the source of that money (us) will ask if it is spent responsibly. This puts us in the position of micromanaging other peoples lives.

5/6/2007 10:08:59 PM

threads like these make me want to fly over Dresden for old times sake

5/6/2007 10:25:31 PM

SPOCK
It does seem likely there had been a group of scientists who had since the
60's been encouraging carefully selected marriages, applied their knowledge of
heredity to the creation of superior offspring...

KIRK
(smiles, interrupts)
'Mad' scientists, of course...

SPOCK
Quite the contrary... These were dedicated men who believed they could produce children who would grow up into wise leaders, take over the world peaceably, put an end to war, famine, greed...

5/7/2007 2:05:58 AM

this has probably already been said but...

require abortions for people without a license? think things through dumbass.

5/7/2007 10:16:11 AM

Quote :

"bbehe: they are although the success rates are not that high. Vasectomies are getting alot better though due to better surgical equipment"

AHA, you are such a douche bag.

You knew there were issues with the "reversible" procedures, but you still suggested them, like, "Hey, let's just tie their tubes and give them some cash.
If they change their minds in the future, they can have them reversed! No biggie!"

YOU SUCK, SUCK, SUCK.

[Edited on May 7, 2007 at 12:08 PM. Reason : sss]

5/7/2007 12:08:00 PM

No, it shouldn't be.

5/7/2007 12:13:12 PM

please god tell me that this thread is remotely serious

5/7/2007 12:14:39 PM

Thanks alot assholes. It was a simple question, I asked yall NOT to get all argumentative and bitchy about the subject, a simple yes or no would have done it. Instead my thread gets moved to the soapbox

The question was hypothetical, I know theres a snowballs chance in hell that it would ever happen, but in my opinion, some people shouldn't be allowed to reproduce.... especially some of you people who dont know how to read!
And to the people who made fun of my spelling, fuck you, like you never spell a wrong goddamn word.

[Edited on May 7, 2007 at 2:02 PM. Reason : ]

5/7/2007 1:58:21 PM

Someone's angry.

5/7/2007 2:07:37 PM

Quote :

" I asked yall NOT to get all argumentative and bitchy about the subject,"

then why did you come here?

5/7/2007 2:19:41 PM

I put my damn topic in the lounge. It was moved here.

5/7/2007 2:35:06 PM

^You did ask that we keep it simple and save the arguing for the Soap Box, but this is not that kind of issue.
It's not, "Do you like dark chocolate? Yes or no?"

I'm disappointed that you still think this is a good idea, sylvershadow. Maybe we haven't been
persuasive enough. Have you familiarized yourself with this issue at all? Cause it sounds like you and your friends
just got stoned one night and decided this was a "great idea...man." You haven't thought this through at all.

Have you learned about eugenics and forced sterilization in any of your classes?

It's an ugly, ugly, ugly thing.

[Edited on May 7, 2007 at 2:39 PM. Reason : sss]

5/7/2007 2:39:01 PM

Nothing encourages personal responsibility like genocide...

5/7/2007 4:27:06 PM

If you get an FUI, do you get your license taken away?

But seriously [NO].

5/7/2007 4:42:04 PM

I never said I was for sterilization. I asked for ideas for government control tho.
like I said, you guys need to learn to read.
And I don't get stoned.

I was really looking for positives and helpful suggestions, not complete rejections and insults.

5/7/2007 9:24:46 PM

you are only going to get rejection and insults when you make a stupid thread like this.

5/7/2007 9:30:38 PM

"I was really looking for positives and helpful suggestions, not complete rejections and insults."

on TWW ????

Seriously though maybe go talk to the folks at the SPCA.

We may not have many real Nazi's left but there is a surplus
of dog Nazis at the SPCA. Just pretend your question is about dogs, they'll
tell you what to cut and when.

5/8/2007 1:30:46 AM

I think that it is an alright idea in theory, but in application it would just be terrible. Plus, there is all those laws and constitutional provisions that this would break! (You know, it's just the Constitution, no need to follow it!)

5/8/2007 2:56:33 PM

Quote :

"I never said I was for sterilization. I asked for ideas for government control tho. like I said, you guys need to learn to read."

Barring someone from reproducing is essentially the same thing as sterilization.

I mean, you can dress it up however you want, you're still angling for the same thing.

5/8/2007 11:00:37 PM

Sterilization is foolish considering the ease, safety, and reversibility of abortions and birth control. Reproductive Licensing is currently unworkable, (same for the death penalty) not because they are universally wrong but because no existing society has matured to a level where these extreme controls could be fair and just. Interestingly, a sufficiently mature society would not have a need for such things anyway so it is a moot point. I would risk living among 1000 murders before I'd condone society to possibly murder an innocent. I believe it is cowardice to try to solve social ills by restricting liberty. I would prefer it if people were forced to solve social ills in better ways: If Whitie couldn't lock up the blacks who rob his house maybe he'd be more motivated to find and eliminate the underlying causes. Greed, social inequality, materialism, etc. I mean, how the hell is it fair to deny someone liberty because he denied you a stereo? All these "protective" laws do is make it easier for the average minded majority to continue living the life they were born into. It would be an act of courage to allow total liberty and it probably would be stressful but it would damn sure create incentives to be a better society. The currency would be knowledge... The status symbol would be friendship... The only protection would be love and understanding.

5/11/2007 2:34:13 AM

government decides if we can drive, when we can drink, what we put in our bodies, when we can have sex... the list goes on. with the logic that those are all fair, they should also be able to control procreation.

I don't think most of those are fair, though, nor do I think the government should control procreation. If you're in favor of drivers licenses and whatnot, though, I don't see how you could logically be against controlled procreation. As witnessed by such events as the andrea yates trial and those stupid vegans who starved their kids, obviously some people shouldn't be allowed to have kids. However, I don't agree with government control of it.

5/11/2007 1:41:16 PM

i didnt read anything above because its all too long and i'm not that bored right now. i will say that i agree on principle, but seeing as how it would give the government too much power and is a situation that woudl be easily corrupted then i must say no way jose.

5/14/2007 4:22:53 PM

until we have a serious threat of overcrowding/overpopulation, i say hell no

5/14/2007 4:49:16 PM