The one animal I would eradicate from the planet...

[deserteagle71]

I maintain that most if not all problems people experience can be traced to over population or lawyers.

Agree 100%. I'm of the opinion that if earth's population was reduced by 75%, the remaining 25% wouldn't need such a high percentage of lawyers in their midst.

 

[the old grind]

I see Sig saying that max number of births might could be secondary to max number of people raised by a society if we are to truly progress. I'm not trying take a moral stand here but IMO when I hear 'pro choice' I imagine just that, not 'pro abortion' as if everything is 'black or white' ...

btw, Apologies for suggesting that civilization got anywhere before 0 AD, Nostradamus, Leni Riefenstahl, Mikhail Kalatozov, Douglas MacArthur, Marshall McLuhan, Vance Packard, George Carlin, Kim Kardashian ...

 

[Jchonline]

Agree 100%. I'm of the opinion that if earth's population was reduced by 75%, the remaining 25% wouldn't need such a high percentage of lawyers in their midst.

Save the cats!

 

[Sigarms]

It's a valid question, but really irrelevant to the initial premise. ****** had an answer; euthanize the mentally and physically impaired, which he did, and this solution was also applied to racial and ethnic undesirables.

And yet even in your own state, it took Skinner vs Oklahoma to stop the slippery slope your own state government was doing BEFORE ****** started doing what he was doing.

At least Oklahoma only looked at prison inmates (something that can be more easily justifiable to more IMO), NC left their own sterilization program up to social workers.

 

[Sigarms]

I see Sig saying that max number of births might could be secondary to max number of people raised by a society if we are to truly progress..

Kind of, sort of, maybe, but that would be the progression

Ultimately what I'm saying is we are supposedly the smarted species on this planet, yet people do stupid ***** like murder and have children when they aren't ready to have children (and care for them in a family environment) for the last 2,000 years.

I understand why animals propagate, but sometimes I have no clue why some humans do.

Locally, we had our first shooting death in a high school this past week. I have little doubt this event came directly from a lack of family environment from both the perps AND victims family.

 

[2LaneCruzer]

And yet even in your own state, it took Skinner vs Oklahoma to stop the slippery slope your own state government was doing BEFORE ****** started doing what he was doing.

At least Oklahoma only looked at prison inmates (something that can be more easily justifiable to more IMO), NC left their own sterilization program up to social workers.

Actually, Skinner was decided in 1942, at least a few years after ******, who came to power in 1932. Here again, morally, I have no problem with compulsory sterilization of certain criminal acts, like sexual abuse of children; legally is another issue; you can lose all of your civil rights, and even your life if your offense is bad enough, so there is a legal argument for it, if you can convince the Supreme Court.
As a side note, in Oklahoma at one time, you could only have one child at state/county expense; the next one required sterilization. In fact, when I was in grade school, one of my friends' mother was sterilized after her sister was born.

 

[Sigarms]

Actually, Skinner was decided in 1942, at least a few years after ******, who came to power in 1932.

My line of thinking was that ****** didn't execute his plan until he could guise it with military conquest. Oklahomas criminal sterilzation act was enacted 4 years prior to Germany's first invastion.

Like yourself, I wouldn't have qualms about compulsory sterilization for certain criminal acts, but what scares me more is the complicity you'd give your own government the power to do so.

Heck, North Carolina had the "Human Better League" founded in 1947 by a bunch of rich people promoting sterilization. Even doctors got on board with the program.

That said, if you can't actually afford to raise children, what's wrong with sterilizing people so they won't have that issue to deal with as they did in Oklahoma?

 

[2LaneCruzer]

The euthanization of the mentally ill and handicapped actually began in 1939 and ended in 1941, about the time he invaded Russia.

Sterilization is certainly a way to prevent unwanted childbirth; the problem is, as you suggest, the government forcing the sterilization on someone who is not a criminal. Plus, when you dehumanize a race or even a fetus, then you can justify abortion or even the Holocaust.
Not saying that it should be illegal, but for me, even a mother aborting a fetus because it is unwanted is morally wrong. Another thing that bothers me is that although it is not a governmental act, it is, in effect government sanctioned.

 

[4570Man]

That said, if you can't actually afford to raise children, what's wrong with sterilizing people so they won't have that issue to deal with as they did in Oklahoma?

It seems that the people that can’t afford to take care of them sit around and have a whole pile of kids and then the cycle repeats itself. Sterilization wasn’t a bad option IMO.

 

[Sigarms]

It seems that the people that can’t afford to take care of them sit around and have a whole pile of kids and then the cycle repeats itself. Sterilization wasn’t a bad option IMO.

I don't disagree with you, however I do disagree with giving the state that kind of power.

Generally state government agencies start out for a legitimate reason, but when given power, that power tends to grow, and then that power tends to get abused in areas where it wasn't intended for.

Being that we are apparently the most intellectual species on our planet, you would think common sense would tell you that if you don't have the time, financial resources or even the willingness to make at least 18 year commitment to have a child, you would take precautions to ensure you won't become pregnant to begin with.

The above is where I give animals a free pass. I don't for humans.

People make mistakes, I get it. The problem is it takes two to tango and you darn well would think people would learn from their first mistake.

The irony is, my dad was one of 11 and my mom one of 12. The impression I got from my mother and father was the line of reasoning back then was the more kids, the more money they brought into the family when they could start work (we're not talking at age 16 either). My dad was helping at age 7 in the family bootlegging mine to heat the house.

I'd like to think I got my work eithic from both my father and mother, who in turn got it from their parents. In that area, I consider myself blessed. I not certain what kids learn when they figure out they are just more money into their parents pocket book.