Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 22, 2014 20:51:44 GMT -5
This is a case of eugenics in Kommiefornia (thanks Mel for the pronoun) State Prisons sterilize women against their will.and California has an ugly "history" of eugenics law. So, we assisted Hitler with his eugenics program. It seem's were not "Kommiefornia" but in reality "Nazi-fornia". From the link in the quote above: It seems the state legislature wasn't any better then than now One dissenting vote?? wow Pretty good sales and marketing must have been used. And in a hundred years we still sterilize women without proper consent. Sh|t.
|
|
|
Post by 1dave on Jun 23, 2014 12:15:37 GMT -5
Amazing how fast the Progressives got Eugenics in operation across the nation. The goal was to get rid of the "undesirables," feeble minded, poor, blacks, . . . back around 1930 - during the Great Depression, one of my relatives lost his wife. Unable to properly care for his 12 children, he turned them over to the state welfare department who sent them to the Utah State Hospital in Provo to "care" for them. The children were immediately sterilized as the poor were clearly undesirable. Ruined their lives.
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Jun 23, 2014 23:04:45 GMT -5
But the Eugenics League, under Margaret Sanger, changed their name. Now they're called Planned parenthood, Almost all of their clinics are situated for easy access by minorities and the poor, and the democrat party (founders of the KKK) are just fine with that.
As you know the victors write the history books, and I often wonder, did we stop hitler simply because he wasn't subtle enough?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 23, 2014 23:08:56 GMT -5
As you know the victors write the history books, and I often wonder, did we stop hitler simply because he wasn't subtle enough? I doubt the answer to that query is that simple. I hate to think it could be. Frack.
|
|
|
Post by Toad on Jun 24, 2014 5:03:56 GMT -5
Teddy Roosevelt was a big eugenics fan...
|
|
chassroc
Cave Dweller
Rocks are abundant when you have rocktumblinghobby pals
Member since January 2005
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by chassroc on Jun 24, 2014 8:06:59 GMT -5
You can throw around the fancy words ...Seems an awful lot like a common sense and financial decision to me. charlie
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 24, 2014 9:05:51 GMT -5
I know this sounds horrible, but being a biologist, I'm kind of with Teddy Roosevelt on this one. Especially when I think of how it was in Commiefornia where it seems to me the humans doing most the reproduction are those with the least favorable characteristics. We are quickly becoming a nation of the lazy, the stupid, the parasitic, and the sheep who think so little they will follow anyone who promises them a lifetime safety net. This sort of unnatural selection, where the least fit to survive are allowed to take over the gene pool is not good for a species in the long run.
Hate to agree with Charlie on anything but it seems good human husbandry, good Darwinism, and common sense to sort out the gene pool a bit when possible, with the caveat that the sorting is done on good biological grounds rather than that of religion, ethnicity etc. *L* But then, I'm an extremist who thinks folks should have to pass a test and get a license before reproducing so we don't wind up a nation of dumbasses.....Mel
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 9:16:53 GMT -5
You can throw around the fancy words ...Seems an awful lot like a common sense and financial decision to me. charlie Really Charlie?? You believe that if your daughter fell on hard times and ended up in prison it is completely acceptable for the government to sterilize her?? Sabre52 Mel - "good husbandry" like prisoners and the underprivileged are cattle??? Biological grounds??? Then some clever scientist will find biological grounds to "prove" a certain type of person is inferior and now we can sterilize/euthanize even more people. Hey! We can prove anything with genetic testing and sound statistical analysis! Why stop at sterilization? They'd be eating valuable food and drinking precious water. Let's just euthanize them. It'd simply be a pragmatic decision for the good of the population. Hey guys. What's your take on Capitol Punishment? Forced sterilization & capitol punishment; I do not see a wide gap between these two concepts. It's a very slippery slope. Mel and Charlie you are both intelligent men. Do you REALLY want government messing with Darwinism? Maybe Teddy woulda preferred to kill his weak 5th cousin. That's be great for my side. No FDR and a lot of stuff never happened!
|
|
Sabre52
Cave Dweller
Me and my gal, Rosie
Member since August 2005
Posts: 20,466
|
Post by Sabre52 on Jun 24, 2014 9:52:56 GMT -5
Hmm, my take on capitol punishment. My take is, all repeat violent criminals should be immediately executed. I'd include many types of repeat offenders including thieves, folks who sell drugs to kids, certain sex offenders, folks who commit fraud etc etc. No reason taxpayers should have to pay to keep these folks in jail for years, Speedy trial, period for appeal to be not longer than a year, then if still guilty be rid of them. Non violet criminals, give them a chance for rehab, say three strikes and you are out permanently. Forced sterilization for convicted criminals should be on a case by case basis. Neutering of male sex criminals, child molesters etc. Not necessary, they should be executed.
Scott. I believe government should mess with it to the extent that we do not reward indigent women for having more kids. Does not necessarily have to be forced for everone but could be done with regulation. If you continue to breed and have kids you cannot afford so that you have to live on other folk's money, voluntary sterilization if you want to continue to receive government funds for the kids you have. If you don't want to limit your reproduction, no more taxpayer money for you.
Scott, I chose not to have kids because I believe the world is becoming overpopulated and there are problems in my family history I did not want to see replicated. " Voluntary good eugenics" If I had a daughter and she was in jail it would not be because she fell on hard times, it would be because she was convicted of being a "criminal". Most folks who fall on hard times do not become criminals so why excuse criminal behavior on that basis?. And I am a big fan of "pragmatic" decisions and as such I believe we always have to watch what our government is doing to keep them honest. I believe one always has to be on guard against their own government excesses. Unlike lots of folks who are content to allow the government to do what it wants as long as they get their free stuff....Mel
PS: Sadly, someday soon , since essentially all life is a competition for resources, we will be down to who deserves to eat, or drink or live. Sorry, but as a scientist, I believe that the folks who contribute to society, are not criminals and who work for a living should be selected for survival. Yeah, harsh logic, but in the end, it always comes down to survival of the fittest for any species.
|
|
chassroc
Cave Dweller
Rocks are abundant when you have rocktumblinghobby pals
Member since January 2005
Posts: 3,586
|
Post by chassroc on Jun 24, 2014 10:30:15 GMT -5
Scott - Sadly, When society must pay to support people who cannot support themselves or their families, willfully take steps to compound the situation and continue to do so beyond a rational point, a functioning society has a responsibility to take necessary action. Not easy to do, but there are hard decisions to be made in any society that are not popular with everyone. We are not talking about one strike and you're out here. We are not talking about cutting off a hand (or worse) because of a hormonal mistake of judgement. We are not talking about telling someone they cannot be an OctoMom, even if that seems like common sense. We are not talking about limiting someone to twenty children because we might believe that defies common sense.
I certainly have said nothing in support of eugenics, just common sense and responsibility.
We are not talking about my daughter here. I have raised my children to support themselves.
Capital Punishment is a different conversation.
I'm not sure what the crack about the Government and Darwinism signifies, but I believe in a society of responsible citizens which includes some limits that some people feel are constrictive; yes ... rules of the people by the people and for the people are necessary for the greater good. none of us like when we are the subject of those rules, but it can happen and will happen for the benefit of most over the whims of the few.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,178
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 24, 2014 12:27:36 GMT -5
I was always comfortable with the Tytler model. A democracy must have responsible people to continue, to perpetuate. Who has the right to judge what is a good and what is a bad human breeding. To me it is obvious, but to another perhaps not so. By the definition of freedom we somewhat hang ourselves since it allows irresponsibility and varied judgement on such a controversial subject as eugenics. And many other subjects involving controversy. Are they going to be control freaks, or are those making eugenic decisions going to have responsibility ? Good sense ? Who the hell sets the standard for a human breeding ? Not one has these answers. But it does not matter. Eugenics will always restrict freedom. And simply create a fight from hell in a free country. Plus I would resent the government telling anyone controlling such. and would not be alone.
|
|
stephent
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2014
Posts: 213
|
Post by stephent on Jun 24, 2014 13:13:40 GMT -5
Govt inspired? Selected by the govt? I think not. It would be "controlled" just like O-care..any major govt officials and lawyers exempt..ditto for friends. Most large political contributors exempt. Fair? ummmm..rethink "fair" and equitable. Far too many at the top now that think they are exempt from anything now. Einstein wasn't quite all there ya know...he had a lot of quirks that would have landed him in the short "snip line". Stephen Hawking would have been euthanized. If ya start with just "less desirables" it will end as well as Hitlers little experiment. And it would depend on just which or who was in power at the time...if all the tree huggers gained absolute power...all of YOUR picking up fossils and pet wood would stop...so would your future off-spring. It's a total huge boulder rolling down a long and steep mountainside....hard to stop. Instant bringing of Orwellian 1994 into play.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 13:13:58 GMT -5
So, let me get this straight. chassroc - Charlie your comment in response to a California eugenics program is most definitely in support of that eugenics program. Liberals FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL for welfare programs and then believe in sterilizing or euthanizing those that benefit from those programs. Isn't a better path to let them fail, teach them responsibility and make the responsible for their own damn lazy asses? This country worked on that philosophy for 150 years. Things worked really well. Nobody felt entitled to other people's money. Nobody wanted to sterilize or euthanize other people. How could they justify it? Actually as I type this, I am now wondering if the welfare programs weren't a means to the end we are now being presented with - Eugenics. Sabre52You completely distrust Obamacare and it's government intrusion into your medical care but completely agree with allowing the same government decide who is going to live/die or be sterilized? That is to say let the government decide if someone else's children will be killed or sterilized. Personally, I distrust government in all these venues. No welfare state. No eugenics. No government involvement in healthcare. Can ya kinda see my point? stephent - spot on!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 13:29:09 GMT -5
Scott, I chose not to have kids because I believe the world is becoming overpopulated and there are problems in my family history I did not want to see replicated. " Voluntary good eugenics" If I had a daughter and she was in jail it would not be because she fell on hard times, it would be because she was convicted of being a "criminal". Most folks who fall on hard times do not become criminals so why excuse criminal behavior on that basis?. I had one daughter for the same reason. More is too many. We drew the line in different places. Actually if your theoretical daughter were imprisoned it could be for something like making her kid walk home (1 mile) from school. Gentlemen, what you and I consider a crime and what actually is a crime in this country are two very different things. So, let me ask you this. Should we sterilize this man (and presumably his child) because somebody decided making a child walk home from school is a crime? No? Where do we draw the line? What about these: or exercising religious freedomtruancyspeaking too long at a school board meetingallowing underage drinking, not loving "enough", what is "enough"?a child's bad grades? there are many more BS reasons to imprison people. I'll find more if you want them.
|
|
stephent
starting to spend too much on rocks
Member since March 2014
Posts: 213
|
Post by stephent on Jun 24, 2014 13:37:05 GMT -5
But...but...but ...Scott!.... o.O You can keep your healthcare plan if you like it! Read my lips...NO new taxes! I will balance the budget! (just pick any from the last 15 years and NO...Billy boy Clinton did NOT in fact balance the budget...it was fudged as bad as his cabinet members tax records) We can stop illegal aliens from coming into this country! (by changing the name from illegal aliens to undocumented immigrants)
Political promises are usually to get elected...neither legally binding nor even close to reality. I see no reason to put the future of my kids or grandkids offspring to any "Exalted Officials" arbitrary decisions of who should live or reproduce. Their track record has SUCKED to say the least! Remove the monetary incentives to sit on lazy asses and the rest will be history made.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 13:55:45 GMT -5
Their track record has SUCKED to say the least! Remove the monetary incentives to sit on lazy asses and the rest will be history made. BUT If you ask them, the ruling class, they will say they believe they are doing a terrific job. Which is the reason they say this?? (a) enough sheeple seem to believe (b) enough sheeple go along with the "progress" (c) they are gaining more power over the masses every minute (d) the chair they sit in is quite comfortable and the liquor plentiful (e) all of the above I'll take E
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,178
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 24, 2014 13:58:48 GMT -5
Many components of a failing Democracy are uncontrollable. It is the nature of the beast. Betcha it continues and there is nothing that can be done. The very definition of freedom is exactly what gets taken advantage of. And will. Not rolling over, just staring down the barrel of insurmountable odds. I do my part-conscience clear. It is the freeloaders,selfish and irresponsible that are coming close to the majority now. That's when damage is irreversible. Eugenics is the least of this countries problems/concerns. Makes good fodder for discussion, no doubt. A discussion on eugenics sure exposes interesting opinions.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,178
|
Post by jamesp on Jun 24, 2014 14:05:44 GMT -5
I still love this country. I find freedom easy to access in this country. And design my life around it. Who wants to live the life of a bum? Ell no. There are people like me, and then there are the rest. I will hang w/the ones like me. It is my choice.ha. solution to problem.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 24, 2014 14:27:02 GMT -5
Agreeing with the forced sterilization of women in a welfare state is approving of the welfare state itself.
|
|
gemfeller
Cave Dweller
Member since June 2011
Posts: 3,813
Member is Online
|
Post by gemfeller on Jun 24, 2014 14:56:33 GMT -5
The authorship of this quote is questioned but in my mind whoever wrote it saw truth:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist until voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
I think there's good reason to think the U.S. is well on its way to the last stage of the formula.
|
|