Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Discuss Irish and International politics

Should people deemed unfit by the state to be parents, be prevented from pro-creating

Yes
6
38%
No
8
50%
Don't know
2
13%
 
Total votes: 16
munsterdevil
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:23 pm

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by munsterdevil » Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:56 am

Hobbesian World View Said:
Sterilising criminals, would help break the cycle of crime that exists in some "deprived" areas, where crime is pretty much the family trade. And I actually think youd be doing a lot of people a favour by sterilising them, in that it would actually improve the quality of their lives, if they didnt have kids to support. The cost and stress of rearing kids drives a lot of less well off people to drink and other social problems.
Just a few questions Hobbesian:

Where exactly are these "deprived" areas?
Which criminals should be "sterilized"?
Do you really think that if some people don't have kids to support it will improve their way of living?
You say a lot of the less well off are driven to drink and other social problems by rearing kids, so are the rich immune from being bad parents and alcoholism?
Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying. Arthur C. Clarke
Tulip1
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: Sligo

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by Tulip1 » Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:57 am

I'm not agreeing with criminals should be castrated. Just because the law doesn't for instance hasj, should somebdy selling that being castrated? Does a Dutch Coffeeshop owner need to be castrated?

Besides that it implies that criminals are unfit parents. This is exactly why I did voted don't know. Where do you stop? Should atheist be catsrated aswell when convicted under the Blasphemy law? Why don't we just catrated all poor people since they comit the most crimes?

This absurd. You fight crime by putting peole in education and developing deprived ereas.

I came to the conclusion that I agree with the forced contraception in extreem cases and extreem only. Kids should come first not the parents. They don't have a choice so somebody should protect them.
Pope says atheists pick & choose their morals. Correct. Today I will be frowning on child abuse & not having a problem with homosexuality.
Tulip1
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 1529
Joined: Sat Aug 08, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: Sligo

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by Tulip1 » Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:57 am

I'm not agreeing with criminals should be castrated. Just because the law doesn't for instance hasj, should somebdy selling that being castrated? Does a Dutch Coffeeshop owner need to be castrated?

Besides that it implies that criminals are unfit parents. This is exactly why I did voted don't know. Where do you stop? Should atheist be catsrated aswell when convicted under the Blasphemy law? Why don't we just catrated all poor people since they comit the most crimes?

This absurd. You fight crime by putting peole in education and developing deprived ereas.

I came to the conclusion that I agree with the forced contraception in extreem cases and extreem only. Kids should come first not the parents. They don't have a choice so somebody should protect them.
Pope says atheists pick & choose their morals. Correct. Today I will be frowning on child abuse & not having a problem with homosexuality.
frau antje
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by frau antje » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:17 am

in the dark ages, whereto we are returning now with the new blasphemy law, :wink:
the handicapped were seen as teachers, of whom you can learn about life, and be grateful for all the things you are able to do yourself without even thinking about it, like walking 3 miles or other simple enjoyments of life.

A friend of mine was recently invited for an audience at the dutch Queen, for his special ability to turn one of the worst streets in a big city to a friendly place, just by living there and talking to people in his street.
His parents were both alcoholics. When he was 8 years old, he ate out of garbage-cans behind the macdonalds. When he was 11 childcare picked him up from school because he was underweight, undernourished and too small for his age.
Because they didn't have sufficient childcare support, he was put in youth-prison for four years, without having done anything wrong. when he was sixteen he was put out on the streets and slept under a footballstadion for 2 years.

now he has his own little firm in gardening and is an inspiration to his environment.
he is a really good friend with his heart in the right place and personally i'm very happy his parents didn't get castrated, no matter how sorry i am that he had to go through all that.

regards, frau antje
Ygern
Atheist Ireland Member
Atheist Ireland Member
Posts: 3003
Joined: Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:02 pm
Location: Cork
Contact:

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by Ygern » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:29 am

Just to clarify a couple of points before this conversation gets a little too Orwellian or off-topic:

* The proposed measure were not meant as punishment but as a preventative measure in extreme cases of existing child abuse
* It was not intended to be an irreversible, permanent condition - i.e. contraception not castration
The universe is huge and old, and rare things happen all the time ~ Lawrence Krauss
Cork Skeptics
frau antje
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 8:33 am

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by frau antje » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:49 am

p.s. if you castrate sex-offenders, so they cannot offend again, it is another deal alltogether. The goal then is not to stop them pro-creating, but to stop them offending. that's different.

contraception only works if the people are willing to take them. How can you inforce that if people want to pro-create? you can't be there 24/7

Maybe best practise is usefull here
in america they did many experiments with actual and chemical castration.
life-timers for sexoffences (mostly repeated child-offences), could get out of jail, provided they agreed with castration. (some experiments with actual and some with chemical castration)
it didn't work too well, because.... they then did the same offences, (it's not about the sexual act, it's about violence, it's about seeing the fear in the eyes of the other) but because they feared jail, now killed their victims.
with chemical castration it could go well for many years. but somewhere down the line, the person would not feel like taking the drugs and fall back in offending.

In singapore if you rape someone, you get six beats with a stock. (a length of wood)
first you get 2 beats, then you go to hospital for four months,
then you get another 2 beats, and go to hospital for four months,
followed by another 2 beats, after which you go to hospital untill you are deemed healed.
Sexoffenders are very rare in singapore. little old ladies walk all alone in the park at night to walk their little doggie.
to the surprise of many europeans.

in holland if you do a sexoffence and you then claim you had a bad childhood, and the one you raped looked exactly like somebody you hate, you maybe get therapy or if you say you have seen the light and won't do it again, you can walk straight away, most of the time.
proof of rape has to be provided bij the victim, actual wounds and internal fysical evidence are not considered proof by the police. (could have been consent and 'wild play', or the adult could have 'misinterpreted' the signals of the child)
in holland there are 200.000 reported rapes a year, by the police by women.
and 20.000 rapes of men (mostly boys), reported at the police a year.
Most people know how it works and don't even file a report. only if necessary for the employer or insurance to explain why you are in the hospital. slowly people are starting to protest more.

a lot of research has been done about child-offences. the grown person who does such a thing, is minimally neglected as a child, has never found adults to trust, and only feels comfortable around children. But because the person is grown, he/she also has 'grown' needs and desires and projects those on the people he/she trusts i.e. children.
Untill now, no therapy has been found, to help these people to grow up and become adults. something in the brain that makes another person attractive to you has been wired up wrong. very dangerous, i don't know the exact percentage of people 'falling back' but it was over 90%.

in my humble opinion the singapore method works best.


regards,
frau antje
smiffy
Posts: 374
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 11:58 pm

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by smiffy » Wed Aug 19, 2009 9:50 am

Ygern wrote:Just to clarify a couple of points before this conversation gets a little too Orwellian or off-topic:

* The proposed measure were not meant as punishment but as a preventative measure in extreme cases of existing child abuse
* It was not intended to be an irreversible, permanent condition - i.e. contraception not castration
The difficulty with any of the measures being proposed to prevent procreation - whether permanent or temporary - is that it violates a fundamental right: the right to bodily integrity. People should have a right to refuse medical or other surgical treatment, and to decide what is done with their own bodies. The example of prison was used earlier in the thread, and certainly prison represents a restriction on certain rights, but prison is specifically intended as a punishment. As to the non-permanent nature of the condition, while this may be true in the case of men, given the limited fertility period of women, if the ability of procreation is forcibly blocked for a certain period in a woman's life, that is not something she can regain at a later date and may be prevented from having children at any point in the future.

If the intention of the proposed measures is the protection of the children concerned, then what is wrong with a system whereby children at risk are taken into care?
Atheism is a religion the same way that NOT collecting stamps is a hobby - Scott Adams
Hobbesian World View
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:42 pm

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by Hobbesian World View » Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:44 am

munsterdevil wrote:Where exactly are these "deprived" areas?
Ask the people who use that term like Bernardos etc. I dont believe in it, thats why I put it in quotes. I would just refer to them as areas with the highest rates of crime, addiction and social problems.
munsterdevil wrote:Which criminals should be "sterilized"?
I already said violent ones.
munsterdevil wrote:Do you really think that if some people don't have kids to support it will improve their way of living?
I said quality of life, not "way of living". I doubt sterilisation will have much impact on their irresponsible feckless "way of living", but they wont be able to damage any young children.
munsterdevil wrote:You say a lot of the less well off are driven to drink and other social problems by rearing kids, so are the rich immune from being bad parents and alcoholism?
No, and I didnt give any reason for you to think that they are.

Please use your brain, before hitting the reply button. Dont be another smiffy.
Last edited by Hobbesian World View on Wed Aug 19, 2009 12:57 pm, edited 6 times in total.
Hobbesian World View
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 3:42 pm

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by Hobbesian World View » Wed Aug 19, 2009 10:56 am

frau antje wrote:in my humble opinion the singapore method works best.
I agree.

Just one clarification, the beatings are in fact "administered all in one caning session and not in 'instalments', contrary to popular belief"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caning_in_ ... _procedure

You can view an entire caning session here.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ebe_1181569371
munsterdevil
Posts: 737
Joined: Sat Jan 05, 2008 4:23 pm

Re: Should unfit people be prevented from pro-creating?

Post by munsterdevil » Wed Aug 19, 2009 1:03 pm

Hobbesian Wrote:
I already said violent ones.
What, every violent criminal? Where does that stop? What level of violence would you have to be at to be sterilized?
No, and I didnt give any reason for you to think that they are.
Oh but yes you did because you said:
The cost and stress of rearing kids drives a lot of less well off people to drink and other social problems.
Why did you not just write people instead of "less well off people".
Please use your brain, before hitting the reply button. Dont be another smiffy.
Please, don't be so chilidsh by resorting to personal attacks and comparing me to other members of Atheist Ireland. Showing your aggressive doesn't make you Atheist of the year :wink:
Two possibilities exist: Either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying. Arthur C. Clarke
Post Reply