Compulsory Sterilization

[Plu]

I do think it is a basic human right. I also think there are very very few, if ANY, cases in which it is acceptable for one human being to control or restrict the reproduction of others.

Well yeah, we know that by now. You keep saying that.

I've yet to see the first word on why you think that, though.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

One could argue that incarceration is intervening in the human body. I think the psychological effects of prison are much more influential on a prisoner than the physical aspect of being locked up and prevented from acting as a functioning member of society.

I don't agree that incarceration and its affects are worse compared to permanent physical alteration of any kind.

Agree to disagree then. It depends entirely on the context I suppose, and what one stands to lose compared to how much one doesn't want to lose it.

The trouble is there is no punishment for parents who neglect their children by continuing to have more and more that they then hand over to the state with not a care in the world. There is literally nothing to stop people just having child after child (a more common occurance than I thought, it seems, listening to my fianceé's mother) because they think sex has no repercussions.

That's horrible. Here physical and verbal abuse..etc. by guardian and parents are punishable by law, but I have no idea how wide the application is. About neglect, there was a general law that if a guardian or a parent is proven to be insufficient in providing the necessary care, education, support is punishable by law. These are all prison sentences that cannot be converted to fine as far as I know.

But as you know Erdo?an declared that families need to have at least 3 children, because our population is not breeding enough any more. So their understanding is based on breeding like puppies. Fortunately most people are not that stupid.  

Sorry, I need to elaborate. There are laws that punish negligent parents, such as those that beat their kids or neglect them or whatever. However, there are no laws that restrict people from abusing their children by simply having more and more and giving them away into the care system (again, something that happends more times than I'd like to think).

And even then, there have been countless times where people have either slipped through or been missed by the welfare net and continued to abuse their children (if they haven't given them away by then), such as the people that my fianceé's mother sees on an almost daily basis at her school. Parent's who don't dress their kids, or shout at them and hit them when they're craving attention because they, as supposed parents, would rather sit down, have a cigarette and drink some beer [in the school grounds! which has happened I am told] then actually look after their growing brood of little people. They can be reported to social services and the state, but often the process is tediously long and full of barriers to people actually intervening on the children's behalfs. Indeed, over the past couple of years there have been some serious neglect cases in the news where parents have been seen by social services, repeatedly, but been allowed to both keep their children and have new ones despite the fact they are seen as a threat to their own children. Google "Baby P" and read about one famous one from a couple of years ago.

So one could draft new legislation to fight this kind of neglect and abuse, but it suffers from the same philosophical and ethical issues as sterilisation. How does one enact a law that seeks to punish people who have no sense of responsibility when it comes to caring for kids? We're all agreed that irresponsible people who just churn out children like they're nothing, or people who just see chidren as objects of ownership ready to be discarded when the status quo of their
situation changes need to be punished in some way, or at the very least made to show that they're in the wrong and change their behaviour. But how?

I'll go blunt. And you'll think I am contradicting myself. No. By force and new laws. Transformation could be painful, but the result would be very good in long term. People need to get a licence to have a child, Fidel. And another check for having more. And this licence should be renewed in every 5 years. State should have the right to revoke it when necessary and criminalise their actions. Against human rights? I don't agree with it. Although this looks like an opinion in conflict with a mind seeing permanent physical alteration on human body as punishment is a no-no, I don't agree it is.

It's certainly an alternative Shoe but I still think it suffers from the same ethical and legilsative issues that sterilisation does. Reading back through the comments it seems that the consensus on the enforcement of such laws would not be trusted if it was left up to the state, which unfortuntely is where the impasse is arrived at.

However, it warrants more analysis and thought on my part, and could work as a way around the physical invasion aspect of sterilisation that seems to be the most objectionable part.

I want to see alternatives to weigh up the pros and cons. So far (not aimed at you Shoe) folk who have objected to the idea of sterilsation have just said 'no' with no clarification or claims on a methodology on how to combat it in another way.

I think enforcing existing laws and applying for them for everyone wold be a good start. Start from Vatican and make it an example of. People who are proven pedophiles and rapists should not be allowed to get any sentence under 10 years a case. No bargain for good behaviour, for nothing. Again? Double it next time, again no bargain. If he/she can't live with the fact that they are children then he/she won't. I am of course just babbling about years of sentence right now. I just mean heavy incarceration punishment is needed without exception. If we could enforce and apply the existing laws for these crimes, there would be a significant progress.

I would also be glad if adult women having sex with underage boys would get the same treatment as adult men having sex with underage girls. But we first need to educate men about this on that patriarchal 'he got lucky young' bullshit I suppose.  

In Turkiye, if it's proven there is consent it's not rape with both boys and girls. *Spit. It's just punished as having sex with a minor, but not rape and this has been exploited so much as you may guess. It's horrible and disgusting.

I understand what you're saying Shoe. I actually take the pragmatic approach when it comes to paedophiles and say that it should be viewed as a mental issue as much as a legal one. I do think incarceration is a must, naturally, but it seems that there's a societal taboo when it comes to talking about it and that needs to be eliminated to allow proper research on the subject.

I do also agree that enforcement needs to be properly managed and enacted where relevent.

[Mermaid]

I do think it is a basic human right. I also think there are very very few, if ANY, cases in which it is acceptable for one human being to control or restrict the reproduction of others.

Well yeah, we know that by now. You keep saying that.

I've yet to see the first word on why you think that, though.

I don't really know what else you are looking for. I think it's wrong to control another person to that degree, fundamentally. The only thing we REALLY own are our own bodies. Nobody has a right to take that away from another person.

Is there something else you need me to say? I am kind of put off by your tone here, have I said something wrong?

[Rin Hato]

I think we should just sterilise everyone, ASAP. Save the Earth.

I also think that stupid people should be banned from being in positions of power. But that's a different thing entirely.

[Plu]

I do think it is a basic human right. I also think there are very very few, if ANY, cases in which it is acceptable for one human being to control or restrict the reproduction of others.

Well yeah, we know that by now. You keep saying that.

I've yet to see the first word on why you think that, though.

I don't really know what else you are looking for. I think it's wrong to control another person to that degree, fundamentally. The only thing we REALLY own are our own bodies. Nobody has a right to take that away from another person.

Is there something else you need me to say? I am kind of put off by your tone here, have I said something wrong?

I understand the basic idea behind "all we own is our bodies and nobody can take that away", but that's not an endpoint. We still don't allow people to kill themselves in most parts of the world. We still barely bat an eye when people circumcise their male children. We vacinate children without their consent. As much as you might want it, we don't get nor give full control to people over their bodies.

So apparently the idea of "owning our bodies" exists (and I support it as a basic concept), but it can be ignored when neccesary. As such, "we own our bodies" alone cannot be the full argument without reasoning why childbirth should not get an exception, the same way that vaccinating children, preventing suicide, or circumcision get an exception.

And as long as you cannot show that reasoning, as much as I'd like to, I cannot give your opinion on this value. Even though I generally think you have very well thought out ones that are worthy of consideration.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I do think it is a basic human right. I also think there are very very few, if ANY, cases in which it is acceptable for one human being to control or restrict the reproduction of others.

Well yeah, we know that by now. You keep saying that.

I've yet to see the first word on why you think that, though.

I don't really know what else you are looking for. I think it's wrong to control another person to that degree, fundamentally. The only thing we REALLY own are our own bodies. Nobody has a right to take that away from another person.

Is there something else you need me to say? I am kind of put off by your tone here, have I said something wrong?

I agree with Plu's comment above. Saying "it's a right" is not an endpoint, you need to justify this notion, especially in the face of instances where this is demonstrably not true (examples as Plu points out above).

For me, rights are earned and not given. Nobody has a 'right' just to have as many kids as they want, especially (or specifically) if they have absolutely no intention of looking after them as evidenced through a track record of neglect and abuse.

It seems as though opponents of this position are happy for a status quo of abuse or neglect to simply continue. If there is no right to intervene (not even through sterilisation but through legislative restrictions), then we are effectively allowing abusers to get away their abuse.

[Mermaid]

And as long as you cannot show that reasoning, as much as I'd like to, I cannot give your opinion on this value. Even though I generally think you have very well thought out ones that are worthy of consideration.

Uh. K.

I guess I am just not feeling a need to justify myself to everyone's satisfaction. If that means you don't value what I have to say, that's the way it is, I guess. *shrug*

I feel how I feel, and I have my principles and beliefs. That's good enough for me, I spose.

you need to justify this notion, especially in the face of instances where this is demonstrably not true (examples as Plu points out above).

Why? My opinions and beliefs aren't facts. They are opinions and beliefs. There is no truth or falsehood to it.

[Mermaid]

And for what it's worth, Plu, my opinions about owning our own bodies and lives does not end with reproduction. I think suicide being illegal is an injustice (and actually a ridiculous law) and circumcision barbaric.

I kind of get what you are looking for here, and I am wondering if I should just keep things like this to myself because honestly?  I live on the very edge of total psychic exhaustion all the time and I come here to let off steam and you people are often hilarious.  The thought of doing the mental inventory and research necessary to craft an erudite argument to support my opinion just makes me tired. If that means I should just shut up then so be it.

[Plu]

Sure, whatever is good enough for you, is good enough for you. I just explained the reason behind my posts, and possibly the reason why you were "put off by my tone", as you said.

Generally when people post on a discussion board it's because they want to share their reasoning behind their opions. I though you were doing the same thing. If you were just sharing how you feel, that's perfectly fine. I can just leave your opinion out in my line of thought, that's no issue. I was just hoping for something more substantial I guess. It's always good to reconsider your opinions, and the more worthy opinions you get, the better you can reach an informed stance on a topic. And it's especially the opinions of those who disagree that are valuable. As long as they are backed with reason, anyway. So I'm just a bit disappointed to not have more pros and cons to add to the list, I guess. But you indeed don't have to justify yourself to my satisfaction, so let's just leave it here :)

[Rin Hato]

I personally won't ever be able to have children "naturally," so I guess I'm not as hung up about someone saying I can't have children/more than 1-2 children as some people would be.

In fact, I'd rather not have children to begin with. It's not that I don't like children (I have a little kids sister and she's wonderful (sometimes)), but that nothing I could do would put more strain on the environment and the economy than having a child. Plus I'm not one for the whole "I need to pass on my genes whatever the cost" because I don't really care about that. The universe seemed to be doing quite fine when I wasn't around, and I'm gonna be dead anyway so what do I care?

I think I most agree with Fidel; the "problem people" are the ones who should be stopped from creating more misery. We put violent people through anger management etc, and I see this as just another form of trying to reduce the amount of suffering in the world.

I also think that people in developed nations should be limited to having a max of 2 children because quite frankly there's way too many humans here already.

[Mermaid]

Meh, I sound kind of whiny, sorry bout that. I am apparently in a pretty foul mood. I am really sad that I am not at the beach with my family for the weekend because I have to work. Plus, well, I am menopausal and I have to work all day Saturday.  :)

[Fidel_Castronaut]

Why? My opinions and beliefs aren't facts. They are opinions and beliefs. There is no truth or falsehood to it.

Because this is a debate. I read that you don't want to get too involved in continuing, which is fine.