Should the governement ever sterilize someone?
 

read

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5771

and answer the poll!

ah shoot, I wanted the voters to be able to check more than one box. Can the powers that be correct that please?

While I understand the "slippery slope" argument, I think it's a strong enough line in the sand to say that criminals can get sterilized (length of time to be determined) and not worry about the government being able to easily extend those restrictions to ordinary citizens later on. After all, no one's worried about the government suddenly deciding arbitrarily who can and can not be incarcerated, right? Sterilization becomes just another form of punishment, like a probation of sorts.

I would prefer that the "criminals" in question only be felons and not, say, your average pot smoker, but then again, pot smokers are already doing something illegal, so theoretically they will continue to not get caught. I'm not worried that the punishments could someday be disproportionate to the crime (like permanently sterilizing pot smokers would be) because I think public outrage would hold it back, just like it would today if some senator said "Hey, I think we need to make a life sentence mandatory for marijuana offenses."

The retarded, though, definitely not. Any children they have will be put in foster care anyway, they're not going to be given the chance the average person has to abuse them first.

I presume you're joking, right?

I presume you're joking, right?

No, I wasn't. I'm not talking about the Patriot Act, this is a different issue. I'm talking about punishment for criminals in general. Are you suggesting that no one should go to prison ever, because giving the government the ability to incarcerate people is too dangerous since they might someday start incarcerating innocent people, or giving shoplifters life sentences?

It is reasonable to have punishment for criminals in the first place, and as such, I believe that this is a reasonable punishment and do not feel there is a danger that it will be extended to the populace at large.

That feature of the poll can't be changed once the poll's opened. Post a new thread and I'll move replies here, to there.

(edit: this is done, now.)

It's not at all clear to me that such a statement would result in public outrage.

Based on the history of past attempts to decide who is and is not fit to reproduce (see "In the Name of Eugenics" by Daniel Kevles) I'm inclined to say the gummint should stay the hell out of it.

Should the governement ever sterilize someone?
 

read

http://cellar.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5771

and answer the poll! [psa] What's your opinion? we'd like to know! [/psa]

okay, I've reposted the poll here:
http://cellar.org/showthread.php?s=&threadid=5777

so this thread should implode any minute now.

I thought pot smokers sterilize themselves.:joint: http://mindscraps.com/s/otn/funny/tdo13.gif

As sensible as it sounds to me in some cases, the government should never sterilize anyone. It reeks of eugenics and the government already has too much control these days.

I don't think people who commit crimes should just be able to waltz off with nary a consequence, but I am deeply concerned about the government arbitrarily deciding to do anything, never mind incarcerating people. In fact the government already does incarcerate innocent people. They're called Muslims, but who cares about them, right?

I have seen little in current events to leave me with a warm fuzzy feeling regarding the government's respect for anybody's rights. The founding fathers shared my pessimistic view of those in authority and gave us the right to keep and bear arms. It wouldn't surprise me a bit if the government decided to incarcerate anybody who got in its way which is why I'm hanging on to my Dad's old semi-automatic.

Sterilize those pot smokers before they produce ....shudder ........hippies!:worried:

NO:p

(threads merged)