Should society consider mandatory sterilization?

a reply to: DeathSlayer

Oh yeah and I do think that it should be controlled. I fully agree with certain aspects of eugenics.

a reply to: andy06shake
I honestly believe that we are not overpopulated, nor will we be for a very long time.

The reason it looks like we are overpopulated, is because people believe that their best chances for survival is in areas were there are large groups of people. They think if everyone else is there, then it must be the best place for them to be.

You can travel just a few miles from huge areas of concentration, and you are likely find large open areas that have the capability of housing large amounts of people. The problem is more greed, loss of human compassion, and loss of the sense of community, than too many people, or not enough resources.

The media has been pushing the "me first" mentality for a long time. Right down to the degree were they make parents stealing food, and hiding food from their children as a normal and acceptable thing.

We have more than enough. Look at our landfills if you doubt it. Better yet, look at what you put in the garbage bin on a daily basis.

We are being lied to, and we are being programmed, and conditioned to give them the okay for our own slaughter.

Trust me on this one, you are not likely special. You are not likely to be spared. Death's sickle is not going pass over your door. You will be reaped in the harvest right along with the rest of us. If you are spared it will be to do the dirty work and to be slaves to the elite.

Elysium will just be another star in the sky for you to dream on.

There are several geographic locations in China and India that are way over populated, and if people don't wake up and realize the planets resources are finite, there won't be anything left for future generation. These over populated areas account for the biggest carbon footprint must deal with their population size which will require a steep decline of children allowed. China apparently has been doing this, but more is needed. I think you have to take a hard look at the population distribution by ethnicity to determine what the equalibrium is, and focus on those indiscriminate breeders be sterilzed after 1-2 children. The over populated areas cannot sustain what they already have, but there should be some incentive for having small families.. and it starts with birth control. I tend to belive that before you have your first child, you should be educated and at a minimun have the ability to pay for the child to avoid poverty and squaler.

I had no problem getting a vasectomy, and baby momma got tubes tied. That is pretty much it for civil approaches, but one can imagine endless possibilities for culling the aging, diseased, and legalize assisted suicide across the board. At some point it will be necessary to violate human rights to accomplish the task, but it would be totally justified to depopulation agenda on this planet. The alternative is a much bleaker, weapon of mass destruction on the largest cities on the planet (which is always an option).

Of course, you could start by kill off the 1% richest elite right off the bat... and redistributing their wealth to the poor. Right.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

To be fair through humanity since its beginnings has always clustered together regarding their best chance for survival, be it caves, villages, towns or city's, safety in numbers has always been a human trait. That and the fact that we are a social animal.

As to our landfills, consider just how large and toxic they would be if they had to accommodate the waste from 10 or 15 billion souls as apposed to 7 Billion.

We have always been lied to and programmed, historically that's what organised religion has always been about. And in this day of age our mass media networks serve the same perverted function.

I dont think im special, cant see where you would get that notion from. I'm just one of many, no more, no less. Everything ends mate after all entropy must incress.

Its the stars in the sky that my save our race should be ever devise a technique of reaching them, certainly go along way as to diluting our ever expanding population considering the size and near infinite size of our universe.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

I honestly believe that we are not overpopulated, nor will we be for a very long time.

Case in point: Germany and Sweden have permitted such an influx of immigration because people are dying faster than they are reproducing. They NEED people.

As far as I know the U.S. is in okay shape in that department, but as our members in other lands point out to us, the U.S. is not the world. lol.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Look at the kind of social and cultural problems the influx of those poor refugees in to European nations is causing.

TPTB are most lightly only a hop, skip and a jump away from re instituting work camps/death camps and populating them with the poor souls. Dont think it cannot happen because history has a habit of repeating itself simply because humanity refuses to learn form her past folly's and transgressions.

As to the U.S if Trump gets in hes going to build a big wall around the southern borders and possibly ban Muslims from entering the country. Trust me that wont work out well by any manner or means.

It would be interesting to find out how many here are all for forced sterializations (for those they see as a drain on society of coure), are also supporting defunding planned parenthood, or breastfeeding in public, or charities like planned parenthood sending money around the globe to provide birth control to women in third world nations. Do you support the right of the catholic hospitals to refuse to do a tubal litigation after they deliver babies by c-section?

Women in some third world countries have very little power to control how many kids they have. They are forced into marriages at very young ages and lack the knowledge of how to control the birth rate. Then, thanks to the UN insisting that they give up on breast feeding and transferring them over to bottle feeding, they might not even have that natural control over their reproduction.

How about before we go and start forcing crap on people, we ensure that they have the knowledge and power to make up their own decisions and enact them? I think you'd find some amazing results when they have the ability to do what they think is right.

a reply to: andy06shake
Sorry. When I say you, I am speaking in generalities. I don't mean you, A06S specifically.

I honestly don't think we have to worry about overpopulation at this time. There is plenty of land mass per person to handle our numbers.

Families and communities can live quite comfortably, even without all the creature comforts that we have been conditioned to expect, and believe are critical to our survival, and that includes electricity.

We need a less parsimonious attitude and a more generous spirit. I am not suggesting that anyone give away anything. Pride in ownership is something that I think will aide in the success of a mutually sustainable world, and it requires reciprocal cooperation.

Since most here thinks their suggestions are for the better good, then we should be thinking of ways to make our resources work for everyone. We don't require anything as drastic as forced or encourage sterilization.

Nature has its own sets of checks and balances, which can be a lot more brutal than we can be. The only difference is that nature knows when to stop, and draw in the reins. Man never knows his limits, and always overshoots them.

Maybe we are over thinking this whole business. Maybe we are supposed to be interdependent. Maybe we were meant to be broken together.



flowingdata.com...
money.cnn.com...
flowingdata.com...

What if we just took the warning labels off of everything, and let nature take its course?

For instance: my curling iron had a warning label to not insert into a body cavity

Darwin had a theory....

You cannot play God, but you can play Justice.

Perv's like rapists and pedophiles, death penalty.

100% chance of a persons genetic makeup producing a seriously deformed child, they still have to approve being sterilized.

Everyone else, don't even go there.

a reply to: NightSkyeB4Dawn

A lot of the things you are proposing I agree with. Tell you this through, it's kind of hard for people to be kind hearted and good natured towards one another while the minority of top 1%ers get rich and everyone else gets the short end of the stick.

Lots and lots and lots and lots and lots of reasons why it is a terrible idea, but instead of a huge list arguing against your eugenics idea, I'll just address a couple of points:

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Next..... intelligence would rise dramatically maybe the first step in realizing wars can be stopped if people can sit around a table and talk like intelligent human beings but more importantly we would have healthy people who could stop from ever having the common cold or flu ever again? Rule out common illnesses and disease as they die off.... clean the genetic code.

How many people with IQs below 70 do you believe are currently sitting around tables deciding to make war? It's not as if a bunch of savages gnawing on their own hands are the ones currently plunging the world into endless wars.

It is doubtful common, rapidly-mutating pathogens would become extinct by having only less-suceptible individuals able to reproduce. It is more likely such diseases would mutate until they became infectious and virulent enough to thrive among the theoretical future more resilient population. Of course, we would have to eliminate people as they grow older and their immune systems because less robust for this to work.

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
Technology and science would faster expand making lives easier on this planet. Maybe closer to being able to feed and house everyone on this planet.... making poverty illegal.

Are you certain about that? The future more-intelligent individuals would still have to fill the roles less-intelligent individuals once served. This would spread the ranks of scientists thinner, reducing the probability of advancements and breakthroughs. Of course, you're right in that it would be easier to feed and house everyone with less people.

originally posted by: DeathSlayer
...instead of killing them we sterilize those and stop the problem by eliminating any possible offspring that end up becoming a problem on society.

In such a program, the statement would more accurately read "...instead of killing them, we forcibly sterilize those who don't fit the parameters, thereby eliminating some but not all of the offspring who will be born with genetic defects which we deem to be problematic for society."

originally posted by: DeathSlayer


What do you think should the world start a sterilization program?

Yes, but here's how we should do it:

Have a worldwide mandatory vote. Everyone who votes YES gets sterilized. Everyone who votes "Heck no, what's wrong with you?" gets to sterilize the eugenicists.

I can't believe this is being advocated for here. You know "conspiracy theorists" would be some of the first folks put on that list.

a reply to: DeathSlayer

No.

This a great idea. We should definitely follow this line of thinking. Let's be a good sport about the matter and start with you and all of your family, you know to lead the way of showing why idiots should be sterilized, and by extension apparently the entirety of their family.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

well, if some see it as okay for force sterialization onto people to control overpopulation,
wouldn't the same logic kind of say it's okay to force pregnancy onto women if underpopulation is a problem?

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

well, if some see it as okay for force sterialization onto people to control overpopulation,
wouldn't the same logic kind of say it's okay to force pregnancy onto women if underpopulation is a problem?

I'm confused about you mean. How is it pertinent, and who is suggesting that?

I think there have been situations historically where governments have offered incentives to have babies.... tax breaks and such.

a reply to: andy06shake

TPTB are most lightly only a hop, skip and a jump away from re instituting work camps/death camps and populating them with the poor souls.

WHAT? lol. I would ask for links to the preparation of the work and death camps, but I think we both know there aren't any.

Get real silly andy.

a reply to: ladyinwaiting

I bet rather a few Jewish people amongst others thought the same prior to 1933. Look how that turned out.

Im not even suggesting its happening yet, just that its a possibility given Humanity's penchant for repeating history.

a reply to: andy06shake

So what have you got on your mind? Who will occupy these camps?