Should The Poor Be Sterilized

Originally posted by OhZone
We (white europeans) introduced various species of plants and animals to foreign lands with disaserous results. Yes, and we also introduced "civilization" to a land that was getting along just fine before we gave them our "help". This however is in no way playing "god". It is playing human.

Well there's no doubt that imperialistic Europeans made Africa worse, but you have to understand that they weren't "getting along just fine" beforehand.

I am curious if you also support this policy of Satan towards Southeast Asia, and Central America, and parts of Estern Europe as well? Or are the dark skins of Africa the only ones that qualify for your blessing of genocide?

I want you to please consider one thing, and focus on answering this question. Before you rant and flame about my first paragraph, please oh please answer me this next question, then you can rant away.

IF THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS STERLIZING PEOPLE, WHAT WOULD YOU PROPOSE TO COMBAT THIS PROBLEM?

Here is my proposal, I hope to hear yours.

We start with one nation, something on the Atlantic coast, like Liberia for instance. We bring in a force of peacekeepers to back up the construction of a free higher education school for interested parties. Once built, the school will look specifically only for men and woman who have a ginuwine interest in developing and bringing prosperity and peace to their country.

The school will then train them for free for advanced engineers of many infrastructure projects, such as water treatment plants, Power plants, waste disposal and recycling centers, and teachers for each of the above.

After a few years we begin construction of the required infrastructure projects utilizing those who were trained in that school, and maintain a global force that MUST respond with deadly force to any attacks against the facilities and/or those who staff them. This will send the message that we actually care about preserving their future, instead of sitting by and watching their hard work get destroyed because of beauracratic policies.

Remember that each of these initiatives is creating jobs, and is helping to reduce hunger, at the same time bringing in the necessary infrastructure for many people to live with oderate comfort without luxury.

At the same time we will be training hopefully the most honest and good hearted police officers to protect these projects, and the neighborhoods. No this will not fix anyones problem overnight, or even a few years. Unfortunately neither will sneding food and money or sterilizing the population. The goal is that all those who were given opportunities will raise children to appreciate what they have and continue the effort to preserve a better way of life, and to fight off evil wherever it sprouts it's ugly head, like internet message boards attempting to justify genocide for instance. After a generation or two, there will be noticeable improvements in that land, and the knowlege will spread throughout.

If I were a leader, this would be my policy. You just have to start with one, and then train them to do the same, one at a time, and never forget to protect them any time they come under attack. If they feel you have abandoned them, which is practically our current policy, then yopu will lose their support, and they will fall into dispair. It takes time for a people to regain confidence in themselves, but it can be done when there are others trying to ginuwinely help them get better.

Revulsion is a learned emotion. I can be eliminated by objectivity.

????

I have no desire to eliminate you ohzone...

Your opinion, however strange I may think it is, I completely support you expressing it...

So have no fear, I wont be advocating your elimination...

Semper

Bit off topic, but...

God damn! I'm sick of this Eurocentric garbage thrown around here. Africa had civilizations and kingdoms when no one in Europe could read or write, much less lived in a civilized manner. Notable examples of African civilizations are Kemet, Nubia, Ghana, Mali, and the Shona-speaking people that built Great Zimbabwe. Hell, the Kemetians were the ones who introduced civilization to the Greeks.

Now that that is said...back to the calls for mass sterilization.

its easy,pass legistlation that says you have to have a license to have a child or really go after the dead beat dads and mothers who run out on kids..i think China has a law where a couple can have only two children...we are overpopulating the world to fast soon she will shake us all off..but as for sterilizing the poor it has happened in the past and i believe it will happen in the future..I believe that the powers that be don't have to go to the sterilization legistlation as long as they never find a cure for anything as they never have.Cancer,AIDS,without them we would have strangled ourselves already...there never can be a cure!!!

If we take 20% of the defense budget, remove a couple of military bases from Europe (let them fend for themselves) and reform our public education, we can drastically cut the number of kids entering the life of alcoholism, drug abuse, and unplanned neglecting parenthood.

Not only that, we can significantly increase the number of innovative thinking and possible businessmen.

Originally posted by DYepes
If we take 20% of the defense budget, remove a couple of military bases from Europe (let them fend for themselves) and reform our public education, we can drastically cut the number of kids entering the life of alcoholism, drug abuse, and unplanned neglecting parenthood.

Not only that, we can significantly increase the number of innovative thinking and possible businessmen.

Government can't solve a problem by throwing money at it.

As for DYepes's post...

Leader of what? The United States? Like I said, you can't force our country's will on another's and expect to succeed. Those in places that need reform need to band together and lead themselves toward change and improvement. There's nothing we can, or should, do.

Should we force rich people to have lots of kids?

Why even bother sterilizing if your excuse is "because it saves unwanted pain and suffering."
If these mothers are nothing but baby breeding toilets which spread aids and make sick children, why not just mercy kill them and put them out of their misery?

That is your argument.
If your willing to exterminate new life because of "pain and suffering" you must also be willing to exterminate existing life for the same reason.

So lets simplify your suggestion of sterilization. Eyespy proposes that we should kill anyone who is suffering from pain and poverty.

If everyone is cool with that lets fire up the furnaces!

DYepes, that is a noble idealistic view. Indeed that is what humans should have begun thousands of years ago. However it seems that we continuously have an elite class of nefarious miscreants who view the masses as game pieces and the Earth as their game board. The seem to have a pathological interst in war games and anything else that promotes human suffering. Every bit of technological progress that has been made has been used in these games to promote more and worse suffering.

quote: Revulsion is a learned emotion. I can be eliminated by objectivity.

????

I have no desire to eliminate you ohzone...
Thanks.

Originally posted by eyespy2
I assume you didn't feel the need to read most of it before you made your comments.

Yeah, your right, but I will Address you now. Please don't take offence to what I say as a personal attack on you.
I will start at the beginning of the thread, and extract your posts, using them as reference points. I will omit points where you repeat yourself, and likewise, omit points where I would normally have to repeat myself.

Originally posted by eyespy2
"Starve the rich?" Grow up! The rich run this world.

Maybe so. But how did the rich get there?
The rich nearly always become rich by exploiting the poor. If there was no poor, there would be no rich.
Besides, Let's determine how you consider what the 'rich' is.
Being rich is determined and based on a ratio scale. Regardless of how much money or power you have, in the end it all means absolutely nothing unless there are people with less money and power than you.
In other words, without the 'poor', the 'rich' would never exist.

Originally posted by eyespy2
To bring a child into this world, just to watch it suffer and die? If people can't be responsible, then why should they be allowed to be irresponcible, when human life is on the line?

Firstly, common sense. Look at nature. The more hardships an animal faces, the more offspring they have to increase their chances to ensure their survival.
Next, who determines what is responsible and what is irresponsible? No person can declare something as irresponsible without first living a significant period of time with the lifestyle in question.
For example, it is now considered as irresponsible and even in some places, illegal to smack your child when he/she misbehaves. Those same people who abide by these consepts and laws then complain about their children being out of control. They then resort to drugs.
What I'm getting at here is that one's idea of what is considered to be irresponsible cannot be forced apon another, as the conditions are not the same and thus do not or rather CANNOT apply.
I believe that regardless of what suffering may be involved, it is irresponsible not to give life a chance.
I'm sure that none too many would disagree with the following statement:
It is better to have a chance and fail, than to have no chance at all.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Mugabe gave all the farm land to his relatives who're not farmers.

I don't see where your going with this. You are running on two seperate lines here. The poor here should not be the issue, as the problem is Mugabe. If anything, you should have made a thread about having the individual Mugabe overthrown, rather than the genocide of an entire class of people. This is more reasonable, more acceptable, and ultimately more realistic.

Originally posted by eyespy2
If you were born in America or any other civilized country on the face of this earth, no matter how poor you were, your family had at least one thing... hope! In America there is always a way.

In Africa, please. When you're living in the middle of a desert, surrounded by nothing, but sand. There are no jobs, or food ... No jobs, no food, no life = no hope.

There is a problem with your logic here, But I am unsure how to put in terms that you would help you truely understand. You yourself nearly brushed on it.
The western concept of 'Hope' Is different to that of non-western backgrounds.
A western view of hope involves a better future. Possibly with the prospect of success, power, money and/or fame.
However, to those of a third world country, hope is an innocent goal. It can be as simple as having subsistence for you or your family for immediate survival.

Methods of achieving this vary. There are always jobs avaliable. It might not be paid well enough to save or invest in a future, but it normally provides enough for the immediate future. In anyway, you don't need a job to obtain food. There are other methods such as growing, trading, and although you might consider it morally wrong, it can always be stolen. Who cares about morals when a human life is on the line right? None the less, That is hope, is it not?

Suggesting the sterilization of people due to your own interpretation of hope is misguided.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Sterilization of women with one child would give them hope of perhaps raising one child to the age of 15 - 20 years old.

You yourself said that most children are massacred by rebels. In light of this, do you really think it's wise to force sterilization apon people after the birth of one child? Should that child be killed in a massacre, there is no hope for the rest of the family or even community. By baring more children they are actually creating hope. If anything, a hope to replenish those whom had fallen.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Millions of Africans are starving as we speak. Thousands are dying every single day. And still, these people are having babies. They have no controll over their lives, this is a fact. So they should not be allowed to have more children, Period the end!

The people you speak of actually do have control over their lives. But ofcourse, that's if they should choose to take it. Only if they have the determination and chances to make their moves.
Admittedly, a good 90% of these people do not take use their "liberties". These people should not be punished for this.
The same goes to say; Them not exercising action is not an invitation for another, such as yourself, to take control of their lives for them.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Genocide: the deliberate and systematic destruction of a racial, political, or cultural group.

I'm not advocating destroying anyone or anything.

Also the Following:

Originally posted by eyespy2
You cannot commit genocide on the un-concieved.

Actually without realising it, you talking about Genocide.
Australia. The Stolen Generation. Heared of this? Basically there were no deaths involved. A generation of children were taken away from their families and bred with white people. This resulted in the offspring of a half-breed generation. The intent was to have the half-breed generation to breed with white people to thin out the 'inferior' genes in the next generation and so forth.
This was stopped after much controversy. It was; and is considered genocide.
Likewase, although your idea does not involve killing, it is none the less, genocide.

Originally posted by eyespy2
I practice what I preach. If I was such a horndog that I could not controll myself, then I would have gotten a vascectomy.

Your Choice. Not theirs.

To add to this, I want you to go out and procreate. You would be insane not to. Breed plenty while you still can. You have a chance. You have hope. Your children will have a chance. Your children will have hope! With the right guidance, your children can make a difference in the world.

Well? Are you going to? Ofcourse not. Having someone suggest to you to go do something that conflicts your interests is exactly what your doing.

Originally posted by eyespy2
It was too inconvient for their parents to consider using a condom, or dad pulling out!

The children are starving. Those are your own words throughout the thread. Do you really think that their first concern is to forgo buying food for those very children only to buy CONDOMS?!
No.
Besides, protection is not widely avaliable. The one thing that may be even less avaliable is education!
Is it their fault that they were not born to a class or environment that allows a free and open eduation? No. Ofcourse not.
You talk of taking away their right to bare children because of their ignorance.
So in essence you are suggesting away their right to bare children because of their class and environment.
A punishment unfit for the 'crime' commited.

Originally posted by eyespy2
So because their parents were stupid, and uncaring, and ignorant, 1,000 babies across the continent of Africa will die tonight.

Check your figures. The same amount of infants will die overnight due to the stupidity of parents in The United States, United Kingdom, and Several countries in Asia.
The media has you exposed to images of Africa, so you don't even consider what is going on in your own back yard.

Originally posted by eyespy2
Many of you keep trying to compare the basic rights of people who live in most civilized countries of the world, to that which is going on in Africa.

Yes, I noticed that. I also noticed that you yourself, are doing the exact same thing.
Where they see their own common way of life, your western ideology sees a problem.
Where you see a western concepts of hope, suffering and responsibilities, they have an entirely different idea of what it means.
Your concepts suit you, in your environment. It wont suit them.
Their concepts suit them, in their environment. It wont suit you.

Originally posted by eyespy2
I don't need to explain myself any more than I already have to state my opinion.

Your absolutely 100% right.
You don't need to explain yourself, and it's not expected of you. At least not from me.
But without it, in the end this can be no more than a philosophical debate of ideas, morals and opinions.





The Following is OFF TOPIC

Originally posted by OhZone
Gear, exactly why should we make donations to feed Africans?

Excuse me? I never said that you should donate.
If anything, I'm actually against people donating.
I don't actively tell people not to donate. I keep to myself if people bring it up in front of me. What ever makes them feel good.
But in the end, the people who really need it the most aren't seeing squat of any of the donations.

Originally posted by OhZone
What is the big deal with some of you who are so fearful of having never been born?

If I was never born, I obviously wouldn't care less.
I just find it offensive and outright insulting when people tell me that I should not exist, or I should forfeit my right to breed, soley due to my socio-economic class.

Originally posted by OhZone
Much of Africa is wallowing in its own feces, and they don't seem to much care.

Likewise, That is pretty outright offensive.

Originally posted by OhZone
Who are we to tell them how to conduct their lives. Leave them to their own devices.
The only way we could really make a difference for them is to show them how to sterilize masses of them.

How ironic.
You contradicted yourself.
You say that we should leave them alone? Then continue to go on and sterilize them!? It's the half-assed attitude like that from people like you which put them in the strife that they are in in the first place!

Originally posted by OhZone
We already showed them how to do productive farming, but they wanted to do it their way.

Seriously. Where exactly did you get your "facts" from?

Originally posted by Gear
Check your figures. The same amount of infants will die overnight due to the stupidity of parents in The United States, United Kingdom, and Several countries in Asia.

Not sure about overnight, but African countries have a higher infant death rate than the United States.

Cia World Factbook: Infant Mortality Rate

The United States is place 180th, with 6.37 deaths per 1,000 live births.

9 out of the 10 countries with the highest rates are African countries. ( Angola, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Niger, Somalia, Mozambique, Mali, Guinea-Bissau, and Chad)

The UK is #193 with 5.01.

Asian countries...Hong Kong is #218, China #103.

So it looks like to me, from those facts that Africa has many more infants dying than the US, UK and Asian countries.

Originally posted by enjoies05

Not sure about overnight, but African countries have a higher infant death rate than the United States.

Cia World Factbook: Infant Mortality Rate

The United States is place 180th, with 6.37 deaths per 1,000 live births.

9 out of the 10 countries with the highest rates are African countries. ( Angola, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Niger, Somalia, Mozambique, Mali, Guinea-Bissau, and Chad)

The UK is #193 with 5.01.

Asian countries...Hong Kong is #218, China #103.

So it looks like to me, from those facts that Africa has many more infants dying than the US, UK and Asian countries.

enjoies, you missed the point entirely.
what Gear said was:

Originally posted by Gear
Check your figures. The same amount of infants will die overnight due to the stupidity of parents in The United States, United Kingdom, and Several countries in Asia.

ever hear of a parent being arrested for neglect or child abuse? ever hear of kids being taken as wards of the state until their parents are proven to be fit?

Ok, so Gear, how many infants die overnight due to the stupidity of the parents? I couldn't find anything about it. All I could find was that.

[edit on 13/5/2007 by enjoies05]

Originally posted by truthseeka
Africa had civilizations and kingdoms when no one in Europe could read or write, much less lived in a civilized manner.

You keep reaching back 3,000 years.
What has Africa done for humanity lately?

Originally posted by Gear
But how did the rich get there? The rich nearly always become rich by exploiting the poor.

That's bunk. Most people who earn a good living EARN their good living. They study hard and work hard to make money.

If there was no poor, there would be no rich.

I could easily turn that around and say that if there were no rich for the poor to suck off of .. there would be no poor who survived.

Originally posted by xEphon
If your willing to exterminate new life because of "pain and suffering" you must also be willing to exterminate existing life for the same reason.

Exactly. And there is the slippery slope. You make it so that the poor can't have children so that you eliminate pain and suffering .. then next it will be the handicapped .. then it will be the sick .. then it will be the homosexuals .. then it will be people with IQs lower than 120 ... then it will be ..... etc etc etc

Originally posted by DYepes
IF THERE WAS NO SUCH THING AS STERLIZING PEOPLE, WHAT WOULD YOU PROPOSE TO COMBAT THIS PROBLEM?

Honestly, I didn't see a single idea in your proposal that any country on the face of this earth is interested in making happen soon enough to make a difference.

You're like, in la,la land - unrealistic for the sake of false compassion.

I'm not here to spout about a dream world DYepes, dreams are for suckers too afraid of taking action in the here and now.

The fact is, that sterilization is an option, and i haven't heard one single argument so far that takes it off the table.

Originally posted by DYepes
If we take 20% of the defense budget, remove a couple of military bases from Europe (let them fend for themselves) and reform our public education, we can drastically cut the number of kids entering the life of alcoholism, drug abuse, and unplanned neglecting parenthood.

Not only that, we can significantly increase the number of innovative thinking and possible businessmen.

Still dreaming DYepes. LOL!!!

Originally posted by Gear

Originally posted by eyespy2
Mugabe gave all the farm land to his relatives who're not farmers.

I don't see where your going with this. You are running on two seperate lines here. The poor here should not be the issue, as the problem is Mugabe. If anything, you should have made a thread about having the individual Mugabe overthrown, rather than the genocide of an entire class of people. This is more reasonable, more acceptable, and ultimately more realistic.

Because of Mugabe's handling of the farm situation, this is the reason there is a shortage of food on the continent of Africa, (and the people I want to sterilize are starving) because almost 70% of the produce came from the farms he stole from the white farmers. That's where I'm going.

Ok, the idea offends you. I'm never offended unless I'm missquoted. So you were careful not to do that and I appreciate it. I read you're entire diatribe, but honestly, I did not see a single piece of information, or idea that trumps sterilization.

Originally posted by karby

ever hear of a parent being arrested for neglect or child abuse? ever hear of kids being taken as wards of the state until their parents are proven to be fit?

Now you're getting somewhere karbster,

I will forgo sterilization, only if we arrest all of the poor people in Africa who can't afford to raise children and separate them so they can't breed in jail, for say, 5 years. Put their current children in orphanages for the same 5 years, separated of course, because mommy see, mommy do, and that should set things straight.

The warlords won't be able to murder them, they'll get 3 square meals a day.

best alternative to sterilization yet.