Should certain men be STERILIZED?

[Philbert]

Uh-Huh...

 

[Jagger69]

I absolutely think certain people should be. I don't care if its politically correct or not, the earth is already over populated and there is no reason that child molesters, people with mental illnesses, rapests etc should have children. I also think there should be a limit on how many children a person can have. In this day and age there is no reason for people to have 5+ kids.

Change your subtitle to read "Officially Checked NSDAP Member". It fits you perfectly.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

Change your subtitle to read "Officially Checked NSDAP Member". It fits you perfectly.

Careful, you're treading closely to Godwin's Law territory there, pard. Well, that and criticizing a precious Snowflake might get us sent to the sin bin.

 

[BlkHawk]

I absolutely think certain people should be. I don't care if its politically correct or not, the earth is already over populated and there is no reason that child molesters, people with mental illnesses, rapests etc should have children. I also think there should be a limit on how many children a person can have. In this day and age there is no reason for people to have 5+ kids.

Let's see who has a defined mental illness: Van Gogh painter of Starry Night and many others; Tesla inventor of way to much to list, his work with electricity and AC current is responsible for most of modern day society; Howard Hughs aviator/inventor; Lincoln; I suspect Edison, from what I have read he didn't bath for weeks; and here's 300 hundred more: http://amandagreenauthor.co.uk/300-...ues-help-highlight-the-stigma-in-our-society/

Look deep enough into history and you will discover that with out the mentally ill we would all still be setting around the fire banging rocks and grunting. There seems to be a direct correlation between mental illness and creativity.

 

[Lacey Black]

Over population is a myth perpetuated by the eugenics crowd as an excuse to weed out those they deem less worthy of living. Congratulations, you have just proven to everyone who reads your post that you agree with the Nazis and Margaret Sanger.

Thankfully in the U.S. those people you deem unworthy are protected from people like you by due process.

:1orglaugh At this entire post. The Nazis believed in ridding the world of certain ethnicities. That is not what I am advocating for at all.

Overpopulation is not a myth. Its not simply about how many people you can stand side by side on the earth. We are depleting the earths resources at an alarming rate and it is extremely difficult to supply enough food and fresh water to so many people. Just because you do not walk by your local McDonalds and see starving children does not mean they do not exist around the world. The world population in 1800 was 1 billion, it is now 7 billion and rising every year. The only way we have been able to supply so much food to so many people is by genetically modifying it, which will have consequences of its own in the years to come. Eventually though that will not be enough and unless some new technology is invented there will be more food shortages and lack of fresh drinking water.


All that aside it does not even begin to address the issues with unemployment. As technology progresses humans are needed less and less in industries all across the world. More people + less jobs will always = more unemployment.

Change your subtitle to read "Officially Checked NSDAP Member". It fits you perfectly.

Aw, I expected a less narrow minded response from you Jagger. Surely you understand that eugenics was practiced by a lot more people than the Nazis, and while it has been abused to discriminate against minorities breeding that is not the only way it can be used. If science gets advanced enough that we are able to detect genetic defects that you will pass along to your children with 100% certainty such as Muscular Dystrophy, Huntington’s Disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's etc then it should be used to prevent a child/adult from living a life of misery.


Sadly life isn't all butterflies and rainbows, eventually when we are both dead and gone the world will have to address these issues unless we are inhabiting other planets.

 

[Philbert]

Most starving people are not starving due to a shortage of food in the world...we waste millions of tons of food a day here, I can't speak for Europe.
We could stop with the corn-into-alcohol BS and have huge amounts of grain available for world-wide consumption, and since most starvation is caused by the stupidity of people, particularly in the 3rd World...you have no idea what you are saying, Lacey with an "E".

 

[xfire]

Eventually though that will not be enough and unless some new technology is invented there will be more food shortages and lack of fresh drinking water.

We've got the technology now to eliminate the potable water problem; solar cells and electric distillers.

 

[Buzzboy]

We've got the technology now to eliminate the potable water problem; solar cells and electric distillers.

Even if you're right, that's only part of the solution.

 

[bobjustbob]

:1orglaugh At this entire post. The Nazis believed in ridding the world of certain ethnicities. That is not what I am advocating for at all.

Overpopulation is not a myth. Its not simply about how many people you can stand side by side on the earth. We are depleting the earths resources at an alarming rate and it is extremely difficult to supply enough food and fresh water to so many people. Just because you do not walk by your local McDonalds and see starving children does not mean they do not exist around the world. The world population in 1800 was 1 billion, it is now 7 billion and rising every year. The only way we have been able to supply so much food to so many people is by genetically modifying it, which will have consequences of its own in the years to come. Eventually though that will not be enough and unless some new technology is invented there will be more food shortages and lack of fresh drinking water.

All that aside it does not even begin to address the issues with unemployment. As technology progresses humans are needed less and less in industries all across the world. More people + less jobs will always = more unemployment.

Aw, I expected a less narrow minded response from you Jagger. Surely you understand that eugenics was practiced by a lot more people than the Nazis, and while it has been abused to discriminate against minorities breeding that is not the only way it can be used. If science gets advanced enough that we are able to detect genetic defects that you will pass along to your children with 100% certainty such as Muscular Dystrophy, Huntington’s Disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's etc then it should be used to prevent a child/adult from living a life of misery.

Sadly life isn't all butterflies and rainbows, eventually when we are both dead and gone the world will have to address these issues unless we are inhabiting other planets.

"You are talking about the nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind!"

 

[Lacey Black]

Most starving people are not starving due to a shortage of food in the world...we waste millions of tons of food a day here, I can't speak for Europe.
We could stop with the corn-into-alcohol BS and have huge amounts of grain available for world-wide consumption, and since most starvation is caused by the stupidity of people, particularly in the 3rd World...you have no idea what you are saying, Lacey with an "E".

This post doesn't even begin to address the other issues I stated. And as usual you are wrong. There are many food shortages due to everything from droughts, over farming land, insects destroying crops, and there simply not being enough food harvested. Lets assume though for one second you were right(funny thought I know) go ahead and try to tell millions of obese americans to stop wasting their food. Please come back and lets us all know how that goes. Oh and congrats on learning how to spell! So proud of you :clap:

We've got the technology now to eliminate the potable water problem; solar cells and electric distillers.

This is true, we do have some of the tech, but Like Buzzboy said it only addresses part of the issues involved with over population. Also good luck getting any of that tech implemented on a large scale.

"You are talking about the nonsensical ravings of a lunatic mind!"

When you lack the knowledge necessary to form an intelligent reply just post a photo, gif or some other sort of animation :thumbsup:

 

[Jagger69]

:Aw, I expected a less narrow minded response from you Jagger. Surely you understand that eugenics was practiced by a lot more people than the Nazis, and while it has been abused to discriminate against minorities breeding that is not the only way it can be used. If science gets advanced enough that we are able to detect genetic defects that you will pass along to your children with 100% certainty such as Muscular Dystrophy, Huntington’s Disease, Alzheimer's, Parkinson's etc then it should be used to prevent a child/adult from living a life of misery.

Sorry, Lacey, but I'm afraid you're the one being narrow-minded. Surely you realize that I used the NSDAP in a purely symbolic sense since they would have to be the poster children for the selective-breeding course of action you are championing. By your reasoning, sterilization of those who may be carriers of "genetic defects" would be widely open to interpretation. How about obesity? People who are just downright ugly? Or of low intelligence? Really bad acne? Men with excessive back hair? Weak-willed drug addicts and alcoholics? Or, just perhaps, those prone to immoral habits (like a penchant for pornography)? Who decides these matters? A slippery slope to traverse to say the least.

This is Pandora's Box personified. Darwin's Theory states that natural selection will continue to allow for the evolution of the species homo sapiens over time as it has done with every other species in the natural history of the planet. Let's just let that run it's course. In the meantime, we'll just have to accept the fact that some of us are less than perfect and stay with the philosophy that "all men are created equal" regardless of these imperfections. As BlkHawk already pointed out, to act in a more selective manner would have prevented the existence of significant historical figures like Tesla, Van Gogh, Howard Hughes, Lincoln, Stephen Hawking, Muhammad Ali, Helen Keller, etc etc....

I'm good with selective breeding when it comes to growing tomatoes or breeding cattle but not when it comes to humans. A very clear delineation is quite apparent in my view.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

:1orglaugh At this entire post. The Nazis believed in ridding the world of certain ethnicities. That is not what I am advocating for at all.

Overpopulation is not a myth.

Over population is indeed a myth. There are enough resources to support far more people. The problem is in logistics and distribution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/14/opinion/overpopulation-is-not-the-problem.html?_r=0
http://www.pop.org/projects/debunk-overpopulation-myth

Your view on history is fucked up beyond belief if you think the Nazis only targeted Jews or other perceived inferior minorities:

While it classified Jews as the priority “enemy,” the Nazi ideological concept of race targeted other groups for persecution, imprisonment, and annihilation, including Roma (Gypsies), people with disabilities, Poles, Soviet prisoners of war, and Afro-Germans. The Nazis also identified political dissidents, Jehovah’s Witnesses, homosexuals, and so-called asocials as enemies and security risks either because they consciously opposed the Nazi regime or some aspect of their behavior did not fit Nazi perceptions of social norms. They sought to eliminate domestic non-conformists and so-called racial threats through a perpetual self-purge of German society.

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article...#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwd

In addition to Jews, the targeted groups included Poles (of whom 2.5 million gentile Poles were killed) and some other Slavic peoples; Soviets (particularly prisoners of war); Romanies (also known as Gypsies) and others who did not belong to the Aryan Herrenvolk "Aryan master race"; the mentally ill, the deaf, the physically disabled and mentally retarded; homosexual and transsexual people; political opponents such as communists, social democrats and socialists; and religious dissidents, i.e. members of Jehovah's Witnesses.[2][3] Taking into account all of the victims of Nazi persecution, they systematically killed an estimated six million Jews and mass murdered an additional eleven million people during the war. Donald Niewyk suggests that the broadest definition, including Soviet civilian deaths would produce a death toll of 17 million.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_victims

Following a eugenics policy, the Nazis believed that the disabled were a burden to society because they needed to be cared for by others; they were also considered an affront to Nazi notions of a society peopled by a perfect, superhuman Aryan race. Around 375,000 individuals were sterilized against their will because of their disabilities.[17]

People with disabilities were also among the first to be killed by the Nazis; the United States Holocaust Memorial museum notes that the T-4 Euthanasia Program, established in 1939, became the "model" for future exterminations by the Nazi regime, and set a precedent for their attempted Jewish genocide.[18] The T-4 Program was established in order to maintain the "purity" of the so-called Aryan race by systematically killing children and adults born with physical deformities or suffering from mental illness; this included use of the first gas chambers. Although Hitler formally ordered a halt to the T-4 program in late August 1941, the killings secretly continued until the war’s end, resulting in the murder of an estimated 275,000 people with disabilities.[19]

Homosexuals were also targets of the Holocaust, as homosexuality was incompatible with Nazism because of their failure to reproduce the "master race". This was combined with the belief among the Nazis that homosexuality could be contagious.[clarification needed] Initially homosexuality was discreetly tolerated while officially shunned. By 1936 Heinrich Himmler led an effort to persecute homosexuals under existing and new anti-homosexual laws. More than one million homosexual Germans were targeted, of whom at least 100,000 were arrested and 50,000 were serving prison terms as convicted homosexuals. An additional unknown number were institutionalized in state-run mental hospitals. Hundreds of European homosexual men living under Nazi occupation were castrated under court order. It is estimated that between 5,000 and 15,000 homosexual men were imprisoned in concentration camps,[21] but it is difficult to put an exact number on how many perished in them. According to Heinz Heger, an Austrian survivor, homosexual men "suffered a higher mortality rate than other relatively small victim groups, such as Jehovah's Witnesses and political prisoners."[22] Male homosexuals in Nazi concentration camps were identified with a pink triangle on their shirts. Lesbians were not normally treated as harshly as homosexual men: they were labeled "anti-social", but were rarely imprisoned for engaging in homosexuality.

I know, it' wikipedia and not the History Channel or OWN but it's accurate.

 

[bobjustbob]

Your overpopulation argument is simply nonsense. Are you to suggest that there are people living in areas with no food or water? That is ridicules. These are the areas where people don't live. Technology to preserve food? Man learned how to do this since the beginning of time. Drying, salting, smoking, burying it are just a handful of ways this was done even before canning. Water can be purified when boiled or distilled. 8 drops of bleach per gallon of dirty water makes it potable in a half hour. That's all the technology we needed to get us this far. The population of NYC grew to over 1 million before it had electricity. No problem feeding them.

As addressed by others, who sets the rules? Are you ready to be sterilized by them? You could test positive for carrying your mentioned defects. Take it a step back, your mom or dad could have tested positive for a chance pass on those defects and a chance that you wouldn't be here.

 

[lurkingdirk]

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to go and bury the leftovers from dinner. Just to experiment. Either it will grow a chicken tree, rot, or be perfectly fine to eat on Saturday.

I kid. Because I'm a kidder.

 

[Lacey Black]

Sorry, Lacey, but I'm afraid you're the one being narrow-minded. Surely you realize that I used the NSDAP in a purely symbolic sense since they would have to be the poster children for the selective-breeding course of action you are championing. By your reasoning, sterilization of those who may be carriers of "genetic defects" would be widely open to interpretation. How about obesity? People who are just downright ugly? Or of low intelligence? Really bad acne? Men with excessive back hair? Weak-willed drug addicts and alcoholics? Or, just perhaps, those prone to immoral habits (like a penchant for pornography)? Who decides these matters? A slippery slope to traverse to say the least.

This is Pandora's Box personified. Darwin's Theory states that natural selection will continue to allow for the evolution of the species homo sapiens over time as it has done with every other species in the natural history of the planet. Let's just let that run it's course. In the meantime, we'll just have to accept the fact that some of us are less than perfect and stay with the philosophy that "all men are created equal" regardless of these imperfections. As BlkHawk already pointed out, to act in a more selective manner would have prevented the existence of significant historical figures like Tesla, Van Gogh, Howard Hughes, Lincoln, Stephen Hawking, Muhammad Ali, Helen Keller, etc etc....

I'm good with selective breeding when it comes to growing tomatoes or breeding cattle but not when it comes to humans. A very clear delineation is quite apparent in my view.

"Men with excessive back hair?" :1orglaugh that made me laugh out loud. No one is the poster child for what I suggested because no one has ever done it. From your post I gather that you are afraid it would be abused and used for things that aren't truly for people that are going to suffer debilitating diseases. I can agree that finding someone trustworthy enough to choose what diseases would be prevented would be nearly impossible. Either way I think it should really come down to responsible parents. If you have a genetic disorder that could ruin your child's life maybe you should adopt instead of needing to spread your exact genes. Sadly not everyone has a child for the right reason.

Over population is indeed a myth. There are enough resources to support far more people. The problem is in logistics and distribution.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/14/opinion/overpopulation-is-not-the-problem.html?_r=0
http://www.pop.org/projects/debunk-overpopulation-myth

Your view on history is fucked up beyond belief if you think the Nazis only targeted Jews or other perceived inferior minorities:

http://www.ushmm.org/wlc/en/article...#WebrootPlugIn#?1#?1#PhreshPhish#?1#?1#agtpwd

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holocaust_victims


I know, it' wikipedia and not the History Channel or OWN but it's accurate.

I stopped reading at Wikipedia. But overpopulation is not a myth, even if you think its not a problem now use your common sense and realize it will be in the future.

And since you like links.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2012/apr/26/earth-population-consumption-disasters

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/13/books/review/countdown-by-alan-weisman.html?pagewanted=all

http://www.cnn.com/2007/TECH/science/09/25/overpopulation.overview/index.html?eref=rss_tech

Your overpopulation argument is simply nonsense. Are you to suggest that there are people living in areas with no food or water? That is ridicules. These are the areas where people don't live. Technology to preserve food? Man learned how to do this since the beginning of time. Drying, salting, smoking, burying it are just a handful of ways this was done even before canning. Water can be purified when boiled or distilled. 8 drops of bleach per gallon of dirty water makes it potable in a half hour. That's all the technology we needed to get us this far. The population of NYC grew to over 1 million before it had electricity. No problem feeding them.

As addressed by others, who sets the rules? Are you ready to be sterilized by them? You could test positive for carrying your mentioned defects. Take it a step back, your mom or dad could have tested positive for a chance pass on those defects and a chance that you wouldn't be here.

This can't even be a serious post.

Are you to suggest that there are people living in areas with no food or water? That is ridicules.

Just one example in our own country.
http://www.examiner.com/article/lak...ought-dries-up-water-supply-las-vegas-trouble

Drying, salting, smoking, burying it are just a handful of ways this was done even before canning

Who said anything about preserving food? We are discussing lack of food to do anything with.

8 drops of bleach per gallon of dirty water makes it potable in a half hour.

http://water.epa.gov/drink/emerprep/emergencydisinfection.cfm

Bleach will kill some, but not all, types of disease-causing organisms that may be in the water.

As addressed by others, who sets the rules? Are you ready to be sterilized by them? You could test positive for carrying your mentioned defects. Take it a step back, your mom or dad could have tested positive for a chance pass on those defects and a chance that you wouldn't be here

I've already addressed the rules with Jagger. But if my parents tested with 100 percent accuracy that I would be bound to a wheelchair for my entire life would I want them to be sterilized? Hell fucking yes. If I was never here at all I would not be here to regret not being here.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

I stopped reading at CNN.

 

[bobjustbob]

Lacey, get ahold of yourself. Lake Mead isn't drying up tomorrow. It fills up then it goes down on a regular basis. We have the technology to bring other water in there. These are called pipes. And if you are afraid of there being not enough 100% pathogen free water then guess what, it doesn't exist unless you radiate it. Water cycles through evaporation and hits the ground and runs through dirt and forms streams where animal piss and shit in it and bugs and algae grow and we still don't have many problems figuring out how to filter it to drink. We still have fire to boil and distill it.

Why did I discuss preserving food? Because this is your statement:

"The only way we have been able to supply so much food to so many people is by genetically modifying it."

Complete and utter nonsense. How is it that populations grow without genetically modified food? They learned how to grow it, preserve it, and transport it. In fact we didn't have genetically modified food before you were born. And speaking about you being born, where have we gone in the field of genetic testing to be 100 percent accurate? If I carry the gene for dwarfism or Down syndrome, will all of my children become dwarfs or Downs and thus I should be sterilized before procreation? It ain't that simple sweetheart.

 

[Ace Boobtoucher]

Bob, you know you can't reason with fanatics.

 

[BlkHawk]

"The only way we have been able to supply so much food to so many people is by genetically modifying it."

Complete and utter nonsense. How is it that populations grow without genetically modified food? They learned how to grow it, preserve it, and transport it. In fact we didn't have genetically modified food before you were born.

You're kind of right in the sense genetically modified plants weren't approved till the 1990's. Genetically modified organisms started around 1980. Cross genetic breeding between different plants really got going in the fifties and sixties. The later tech is what created the massive yield boosts, in some cases quadrupling yields or more. This more than anything else prevented mass starvation in later part of the twentieth century. Learning how to grow, transport, and store plays a role of course, but the dramatic yield increases came from creating new species through genetic cross breeding.

As for my source of information, twenty years of farming, or you can look up Norman Borlaug, a pioneer in the field. In a nutshell what we plant today for wheat, rice, and corn is substantially different from what was planted a century ago.

 

[BlkHawk]

Additionally our present methods of farming may not be sustainable indefinitely. We are able to maintain the yields we have now by applying nitrogen fertilizer to the soil. We get that currently from petrochemicals. This is also increasing the level of nitrates in the water tables substantially.

Now I'm against forced sterilization, but I also like safe bets. Encouraging couples to voluntarily stop at one or two children, plus continually improving ag tech is the safer bet; rather than relying on the assumption that we will always be able to increase crop yields.