Mentally Retarded sterilized?

Mentally Handicapped sterilized?

yes	41.2%	[ 28 ]
no	33.8%	[ 23 ]
depends	25.0%	[ 17 ]
Total Votes:			[ 68 ]

[Wonkiphant]

Ew.
sad
Uh, OP, mentally-retarded people are still people - and forcibly sterilizing people is wrong.
While I do agree that there is a level of mental-retardation that makes someone unfit to be a parent, sterilization isn't the answer - nor will it ever be.
There's plenty of non-retarded people out there that shouldn't be parents, but are - should we sterilize them as well?
Not only is it shitting all over basic human rights, but the line between mentally-retarded people capable of caring for a child and ones that aren't capable is a vague one to be screwing around with.
You'd have to individually screen each person deemed mentally-retarded - and even then, who's to say that they may not improve as time goes on, and be capable of caring for a child in the future?
I mean, it's not as dumb as trying to sterilize people who can't provide for a child (ohwait lol that's already been brought up in this thread), but it's not a very well thought out plan.

[Blueyedancer]

The LDs Juxtaposed

Blueyedancer

The LDs Juxtaposed

Blueyedancer

Saffron Bunny

I completely agree with this. I would think it would be a larger punishment if a mentally handicapped person were to have a child, have no idea how to take care of it, and eventually have it taken from them by Child Protective Services, as if there already aren't enough unwanted children in the world. With the American government continuing their bullshit stance on how gay couples can't adopt mixed with the cost of adoption, these poor kids might never actually have a family. They'll just be bounced around in foster families and whatnot.

It might sound harsh to sterilize the mentally handicapped, but honestly, it's even more harsh to have a child involved in that kind of environment.

Exactally what I'm thinking... people with mental retardation usually don't understand that they need to take care of a baby...and that attacking someone is bad.. its better to stop this from happening then to actually have it happen. what does the person with mental retardation miss if they're sterelized? nothing, they don't care... what happens if a kid gets brought up in that life? what if someone gets attacked? obviously more difference between the two.

People with downs generally don't have kids so this entire thread is entirely pointless.

Obviously they do because I know of people and a few others in this thread know of them.

Anecdotal means nothing however.

So once again, unless you can provide a source saying that over 1% of children born each year are from down syndrome parents your point is moot.

I didn't say anything like that. I just see reasons why I would be for it. Others obviously do too. Not saying its an epidemic but it does happen. I don't see how it would be a bad thing to stop it.

[The LDs Juxtaposed]

Blueyedancer

The LDs Juxtaposed

Blueyedancer

The LDs Juxtaposed

Blueyedancer

Saffron Bunny

I completely agree with this. I would think it would be a larger punishment if a mentally handicapped person were to have a child, have no idea how to take care of it, and eventually have it taken from them by Child Protective Services, as if there already aren't enough unwanted children in the world. With the American government continuing their bullshit stance on how gay couples can't adopt mixed with the cost of adoption, these poor kids might never actually have a family. They'll just be bounced around in foster families and whatnot.

It might sound harsh to sterilize the mentally handicapped, but honestly, it's even more harsh to have a child involved in that kind of environment.

Exactally what I'm thinking... people with mental retardation usually don't understand that they need to take care of a baby...and that attacking someone is bad.. its better to stop this from happening then to actually have it happen. what does the person with mental retardation miss if they're sterelized? nothing, they don't care... what happens if a kid gets brought up in that life? what if someone gets attacked? obviously more difference between the two.

People with downs generally don't have kids so this entire thread is entirely pointless.

Obviously they do because I know of people and a few others in this thread know of them.

Anecdotal means nothing however.

So once again, unless you can provide a source saying that over 1% of children born each year are from down syndrome parents your point is moot.

I didn't say anything like that. I just see reasons why I would be for it. Others obviously do too. Not saying its an epidemic but it does happen. I don't see how it would be a bad thing to stop it.

Oh you don't see how?

Alright fine.

I don't see how it's a bad thing to sterilize everyone who doesn't make less than 500k per year.

Poor people don't contribute to society.

[tiramiiisu]

[Skjolddis]

Blueyedancer

Skjolddis

We tried that before, silly.

I love your avi first off... I heard something of the sort.. i didn't think it was for actual mentally handicapped people.

Thank you.

Forced sterilization has an ugly history. The mentally handicapped were most definitely a target.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1449330/

[Pepper Prince]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought some cases of mental problems, like downs syndrome, due to the extra or missing chromosome they can't reproduce cause the no. of chromosomes in the gametes are wrong.

[The Forbidden Soul]

As good as you intentions are, if you were to give the government this type of power then that might very well cause a disastrous slippery slope, not to mention you are in the first place letting the government have control over a human right. It is everyone's human right to have kids, and to have their body fully functional as a human being.
Back to the slippery slope thing, if you give the government power to take that human right of reproduction away from someone over impaired intelligence they could very well start administering IQ tests to everyone(this is hypothetical of course), and say if they score low enough they too take that person's human rights away to reproduction and a completely fine functional body (or part of that body). Even though this may be considered a good thing, (Getting the stupids out of the gene pool) there can be geniuses born out of stupid people. Even austistic people can be a genius in one area and just handicapped in another, my brother for example is autistic and yet hes considered a mathematical genius.
Anyways if you give the government control over any of our rights then that will start a slippery slope to completely abolish the right all together. Look at the 2nd amendment, for years now the government has been making it harder and harder to own a gun, if people didnt notice it and start fighting against it I am willing to bet that our second amendment right would have been gone by now. I dont even carry a gun, and yet cops stop me over a knife, just a knife sad Its all because the government was given permission by voters to tamper with it, and they always take the extra mile.
Slippery slopes are "no bueno"

[Slinkenhofer]

Baby Blue Bomber

The government doesn't get to decide who can and can't have children.
This really isn't up for debate.

Then why post here? I'm enjoying the arguments, and you come here and contribute nothing of importance to this discussion. It's more of an ethical question than anything else, I'm pretty sure everyone here is aware that the government doesn't have the power to pass any legislation on this matter.

[Only Gray]

It sounds terrible... but yes.

It feels like we're shutting them off. Might as well build a small world just for them.
What for? For our own safety. sad

[Mangledhasleftthebuilding]

I have mixed emotions about this.

I think it's wrong to take away someone's choice when it comes to reproduction, but at the same time, children shouldn't be brought into this world to be neglected.

I think it's just overall more practical to try and slow down the multiplication of retarded people, especially since let's face it; we have limited resources. Might as well reserve them for those who are aware that they're using them. I think there are too many people on the planet, anyway. Wouldn't hurt to eliminate the "bad apples."

But that's incredibly bitchy of me, and it'd be downright intolerable for me to suggest forcibly sterilizing someone in order to achieve my ideals.

I really don't know what to say about this.

[zaptar13]

Seems like a good idea to me.

[Lamiroir]

Very Beautiful Samira

I was scrolling down the page when I saw that pic.
I lol'd so hard.

[Slinkenhofer]

Baby Blue Bomber

thefluffygamer

Baby Blue Bomber

The government doesn't get to decide who can and can't have children.
This really isn't up for debate.

Then why post here? I'm enjoying the arguments, and you come here and contribute nothing of importance to this discussion. It's more of an ethical question than anything else, I'm pretty sure everyone here is aware that the government doesn't have the power to pass any legislation on this matter.

Because it's a public forum, and I'll post wherever I want.
Contribute nothing? I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were the discussion police. Please forgive me Officer Dipshit.
It's not an ethical question, it's a ******** retarded one. Everyone who agreed with anything you said in your OP is an idiot.

Well, if you feel it's your place in the world to criticize everyone, then go right ahead. I'm sorry you feel it's your duty to tell everyone off, but I guess that's your choice. Have a good day.