Government sponsored sterilization

[Tisket]

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=5886592&page=1


Pol Suggests Paying Poor Women to Tie Tubes
Louisiana's John LaBruzzo Comes Under Fire for Suggesting $1,000 Payments to Poor Women, Tax Incentives for Wealthy Couples
By MARCUS BARAM
September 25, 2008

As Hurricane Gustav loomed off the coast of Louisiana, thousands of impoverished people flocked into shelters, where some of them seemed unprepared to take care of their young children's basic needs, forgetting to bring along diapers or medicine.

Louisiana state rep. John LaBruzzo stirred up controversy with his plan to study a plan to pay poor women $1,000 to undergo reproductive sterilization.
(ABCNews Photo Illustration)That heartbreaking scenario inspired Louisiana Republican State Rep. John LaBruzzo to start thinking about ways to stem generational welfare, in which many welfare recipients have children who also end up dependent on government assistance, according to the representative.

His idea -- giving $1,000 to poor women to undergo reproductive sterilization by Fallopian tube ligation -- is stirring up controversy among some medical professionals, who say that the proposal is offensive and smacks of long-discredited eugenics programs.

LaBruzzo has also suggested other controversial ideas: paying poor men to get vasectomies and giving tax incentives for college-educated wealthy couples to have more children.

[sst]

Wow thanks for posting nothing but a article... maybe you could put your opinion down too

<--supports it

[Keller]

I've always thought (but recognized it could never happen) that all babies should be sterilized (like a circumcision) and we should apply to have children as adults.

That's likely my most extreme view.

[CrystalTears]

I can think of a few people I wished had gotten sterilized.

[Tisket]

I didn't post an opinion because I am still digesting the idea. Part of me feels it is government sponsored mutilation of the poor. Something has to be done but I'm not sure this is it.

[Clove]

Something has to be done but I'm not sure this is it.Yeah, give them a deck of cards.

[Clove]

Wow thanks for posting nothing but a article... maybe you could put your opinion down too

<--supports itWhy don't you clean a rifle.

[CrystalTears]

How about they offer that incentive to anyone (rich or poor) to have their tubes tied at any time (with or without children).

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I don't like this idea.

What next, after the poor the Government goes after the people with health problems and encourages them to get sterilized so they don't pass on their bad genetics?

Yes, something should be done to address the cycle of poverty but I don't feel this is the answer.

[Nieninque]

Why don't you clean a loaded rifle.

^

[Clove]

How about this, if you continue to have children while on state assistance they become wards of the state; but you are still required to contribute financially to their support. Lose the kid, receive less income.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

How about they offer that incentive to anyone (rich or poor) to have their tubes tied at any time (with or without children).

I'd feel better about this, but I think it would still be targeted at poorer people.

Right now it's really hard for a woman under the age of 30 who doesn't have kids to get a tubal ligation. Even getting an IUD is a challenge if you're under 30 and childless. I'm down for making it easier for women to get it done if they want it, but I'm really on the fence about any sort of incentive to do it/not do it at this point.

[Nieninque]

How about this, if you continue to have children while on state assistance they become wards of the state; but you are still required to contribute financially to their support. Lose the kid, receive less income.

Right...what we really need is more kids in care.

[CrystalTears]

Right now it's really hard for a woman under the age of 30 who doesn't have kids to get a tubal ligation. Even getting an IUD is a challenge if you're under 30 and childless. I'm down for making it easier for women to get it done if they want it, but I'm really on the fence about any sort of incentive to do it/not do it at this point.
That was mainly why I suggested it, simply because of how hard it is to get early and prior to having children. Someone who is sure they don't want kids should be able to have it done, and hell, get some help paying for it as well.

[DeV]

My only issue is that stupid rich people would still have the option of continuing their line of generational idiocy.

[Tsa`ah]

I don't like this idea.

What next, after the poor the Government goes after the people with health problems and encourages them to get sterilized so they don't pass on their bad genetics?

Yes, something should be done to address the cycle of poverty but I don't feel this is the answer.

There was a group in Cali that offered crack addicts monetary incentives for sterilization. Considering the number of addicted and infected infants born to these people ... I supported the plan (with cash) ... though I'll have to dig up the name of the group since it's been over seven years.

That aside, the answer is healthcare and education. Neither is going to solve the problem overnight, but rather we'll see a difference a generation or two down the line.

That anyone can have their head so far up their ass ... well I'll stop there since Dave is a prime example and I'm sure a few other examples will chime in as well.

[Tsa`ah]

My only issue is that stupid rich people would still have the option of continuing their line of generational idiocy.

And get a tax incentive for it.

[sst]

I didn't post an opinion because I am still digesting the idea. Part of me feels it is government sponsored mutilation of the poor. Something has to be done but I'm not sure this is it.

much better.

[Tisket]

much better.

Moron.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

That aside, the answer is healthcare and education.

I agree.. those two areas in general need some reform. Some of which is providing cheap sterilization to those who desire it (no matter their income, but especially no matter their age or whether or not they've had children yet).. but also why I support comprehensive sex education and keeping abortions legal and accessible.

[Tsa`ah]

How about this, if you continue to have children while on state assistance they become wards of the state; but you are still required to contribute financially to their support. Lose the kid, receive less income.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Proposal

[ElanthianSiren]

No and No.

This is a good theory, but like most other theories, I suspect when it'd be taken from paper to practice, it'd fall flat. Becoming educated about reproductive practices really isn't that difficult, regardless of what your intent is.

[sst]

It's not a matter of the difficulty its a matter of their desire to do it.

[Keller]

This does give me an opportunity to stand on my tax soap-box: Get rid of the damn child credit. Having children is a consumption choice -- just like getting a dog or buying a boat. Have a child -- fine; but I don't want to subsidize your choice to raise a child instead of remodeling your kitchen.

[Nieninque]

Moron.

State the obvious why dont you.

[Drew]

I've always thought (but recognized it could never happen) that all babies should be sterilized (like a circumcision) and we should apply to have children as adults.

That's likely my most extreme view.



I've thought that this is a decent idea until I think of who would do the reviewing.

[Keller]

I've thought that this is a decent idea until I think of who would do the reviewing.

Compared to the idiots who are popping out the kids?

I trust the government.

[Clove]

Right...what we really need is more kids in care.You'd have to be dumber than Ilvane to have and pay for children you can't raise. Trust me this removes all incentive.

You're putting out the "if we give condoms to kids they'll have more sex and therefore more babies" ignoring the fact that the condoms are the remedy for that condition in the first place.

[Methais]

Wow thanks for posting nothing but a article... maybe you could put your opinion down too

<--supports it

Too bad your parents didn't support it.

[Tsa`ah]

You'd have to be dumber than Ilvane to have and pay for children you can't raise. Trust me this removes all incentive.

You're putting out the "if we give condoms to kids they'll have more sex and therefore more babies" ignoring the fact that the condoms are the remedy for that condition in the first place.

:banghead:

That's about all this post is worth in response.

[Gan]

I've always thought (but recognized it could never happen) that all babies should be sterilized (like a circumcision) and we should apply to have children as adults.

That's likely my most extreme view.

I've said many times here that people should be required to take and pass a test before being allowed to have children.

[Gan]

:banghead:

That's about all this post is worth in response.

Thats really all thats comprehensible in the posts you respond with too. ;)

[Tsa`ah]

You're so clever ... even for a douche.

[Gan]

Too bad your parents didn't support it.

HOLY MOTHER OF burn.

LOL

[Gan]

You're so clever ... even for a douche.

ooooh burn

[Some Rogue]

This does give me an opportunity to stand on my tax soap-box: Get rid of the damn child credit. Having children is a consumption choice -- just like getting a dog or buying a boat. Have a child -- fine; but I don't want to subsidize your choice to raise a child instead of remodeling your kitchen.

Agree 100%.

This is how people, like my brother and his wife who make a decent living, make more back in tax refunds than they pay in all year. Grrrr.

[Gan]

Have a kid then get back to me...

[Jorddyn]

I'm all for free tubal ligation, vasectomies, condoms, and birth control pills for anyone. Well, ok, only women get the birth control pills. Can't say as I like the incentive pay, but I'd go for free transportation and child care for those who need it.

I'm even bigger on education - sex ed (to limit chances of pregnancy), finance ed (how are you going to pay for the kid), general ed (to get a good job).

[Keller]

Have a kid then get back to me...

I choose not to. I can't afford it. I chose to go to law school (debt), move across the country, and live in a nice apartment in the middle of the city.

I want to have kids and I will in the next couple of years. But right now I'm spending my money on other things. And I don't expect the government to subsidize my consumption choices.

[Mighty Nikkisaurus]

I'm all for free tubal ligation, vasectomies, condoms, and birth control pills for anyone. Well, ok, only women get the birth control pills. Can't say as I like the incentive pay, but I'd go for free transportation and child care for those who need it.

I'm even bigger on education - sex ed (to limit chances of pregnancy), finance ed (how are you going to pay for the kid), general ed (to get a good job).

I've always felt financial education should be required.

I did marketing all four years of high school and it was invaluable to me.. learning everything from the various ways to invest your money (and why you should do so) to how to do your taxes. Also did a lot on how to make resumes, cover letters, learned the steps to starting up various types of businesses, how to manage/move up the ranks in established businesses, etc.

[Gan]

I choose not to. I can't afford it. I chose to go to law school (debt), move across the country, and live in a nice apartment in the middle of the city.

I want to have kids and I will in the next couple of years. But right now I'm spending my money on other things. And I don't expect the government to subsidize my consumption choices.

Do you itemize your taxes?

[Keller]

Do you itemize your taxes?

Why?

[Keller]

And no, I don't.

I wasn't being intentionally obtuse. :)

[ViridianAsp]

In all honesty, I think it's men who should be sterilized, not women. And not just the poor, rich ones too.

[Some Rogue]

Or both, since you know...a woman might possibly sleep with a married man. A shock, I know. :jerkit:

[Jorddyn]

Why?

Because that's another way the government subsidizes your consumption choices. Biggies would be mortgage interest, PMI, real estate taxes, and charitable contributions.

[Drew]

I've said many times here that people should be required to take and pass a test before being allowed to have children.



Tester: Should children be hit or spanked?
Me: I think that, properly applied, spanking a child is conducive to a good upbringing.
Tester: DENIED.

[Paradii]

I've said many times here that people should be required to take and pass a test before being allowed to have children.

Just out of curiosity, if your idea became the law, would people who get pregnant without taking/passing said test be forced to have an abortion, receive a fine, or risk jail time?

[Jorddyn]

Just out of curiosity, if your idea became the law, would people who get pregnant without taking/passing said test be forced to have an abortion, receive a fine, or risk jail time?

9 months in jail, spent studying for the test of course.

[radamanthys]

As long as the gubbermint isn't mandating it, only offering it.

It's a really good idea. If they have a kid, it'd end up costing us way more than a grand anyway. And if they're just doing it for the cash incentive, this plan takes that choice away.

What's wrong with it? It's not eugenics since it's not a matter of racial/genetic purification. It's not forced. The procedure already exists, the government would just be sponsoring people to have the operation, plus tossing them a little pocket cash.

[Keller]

Because that's another way the government subsidizes your consumption choices. Biggies would be mortgage interest, PMI, real estate taxes, and charitable contributions.

I've been on record opposing those, too (except charitable contributions; I reserve judgment on that one).

[Clove]

:banghead:

That's about all this post is worth in response.It's alright, we're used to your inability to construct arguments.

[Jorddyn]

I've been on record opposing those, too (except charitable contributions; I reserve judgment on that one).

I oppose the entire tax code. It's ridiculous, bulky, easy to manipulate for certain people, a waste of time, a waste of paper, a waste of resources, and really just stupid.