All I'm gonna say is if people have a right to have kids, that would mean that convicted child rapists also have that right. These are people who need their dicks cut off or their cunts concreted up!!!
No, people do not automatically have a right to have kids. It's an honor, a privilege... it should be earned!
WHY is there not greater focus on the fact that procreation of our species at this point is profoundly selfish with regards to the non-sustainability of our over crowded planet?
IS it a willful blindness of an inconvenient truth, or remarkable arrogance of the "entitled" breeders that drives this ignorance?
WHAT will it take to have the breeders show some restraint, and to have them recognize that they are quickening the starvation of those already on this shrinking planet?
When I was in high school, we had a family life class. It was all about budgeting, wedding planning, family planning, raising children. We all got a raw egg that was our "baby". We had to take care of it for two weeks and write a report containing expenses, how we cared for the baby, what we did with it, who babysat, etc. It was very lightweight compared to the real information needed to care for a child. And, like most public school electives, that class has fallen due to budget cuts.
Every day I see examples of children being parented by people by adults lacking the basic skills to do so. I'm not talking about whether to spank or not, allowing a kid to backtalk or any of that. I see kids coming to school in sub zero weather wearing no snow pants, no hats, no mittens... I see children walk into the school carrying a can of mountain dew and a sweet pastry and calling that breakfast.
Education is needed and it has to start before people have their first child.
I have to state that I am 100% for mandatory classes for any person who will be parenting (this is biological or adoptive parents). Cover the basics of how to care for a child and their physical well being. Have classes every one or two years attending to the next phase of childhood. I hate to have more government involvement in our lives, but I see too many children who need more protection.
I agree that many people out here who are parents may not be qualified to do so, but that is comparing my thoughts on good parenting with theirs, and they may not agree with mine, etc. There really is no true way to go about something like this, unfortunately.
Even with all the problems you cite, it may be that at some point our survival as a species may be contingent upon us placing some restrictions on reproductive freedom. Overpopulation and life extension may make the issue of paternity licenses necessary. In fact we may be close to needing to do so now. We could already have a population that exceeds the sustainable resource load on our environment. In the competition between species survival vs. human rights is side with survival.
The problem, for me, is people confuse reproduction with parenting. They think that because they can physically create a child that is all it takes to be a parent. So no, do not control who may have children but I would be fine with instituting a policy of mandatory parenting classes. You have a child, you have to take a class on how to care for it, maybe with periodic refresher courses for challenges that come with the different ages.
Did a bit of investigating, and found David Attenborough's recent doco about how many people this planet can sustain. Predictably shocking. The doco came up with education as the most effective solution overall. And the solution is to STOP reproducing. I've known this for years & decided NOT to "excercise my right to have a child." To me it's not your right. It is a selfish decision, to insist you are entitled to reproduce on this planet after all the years of abuse by humans.
Everyone should stop focusing on who shouldn't have children and focus on who has children.For example, My neighbors have had their children taken by CPS 3 times in the past 5 years I have lived here. I know they have had to be taken away many more times. The fathers record, I looked it up, its full of domestic charges among other things. How can we continue to let these people get their children back? Let's focus on that.
GTF, could you name a cirxcumstance excluding sexual or physical abuse where you think it would be appropriate for the removal of a child? I personally think miscare is also excluded in violent conduct as well. Personally I think people most of the time try to do their best.
The desire for easy answers can lead to appalling suggestions. I can understand the aesthetic appeal of simple statements. I can understand the confidence inspiring power of science. However, I would feel much better if the individuals so bolstered by the benefits of modern science knew what it means to win knowledge from Universe, or had to live with consequences of such blanket policies. Is wisdom really so self-evident? I know the perpetrators of so many forms of human sacrifice thought so.
Sorry Paul, your empathy for the person, but not the species, is in dire error. Simply put, we either forge a way to make eugenics a fair & least brutal reality, as a species, or nature will brutally defend itself from a disease. The bio-web has no discrimination that humans might universally choose; we will simply be dead.
Overpopulation is not a nuisance, it is THE problem.
I agree with you on this. Once you start setting criteria and limiting who can and can not be a parent, you open up a whole can of criterias set on personal opinion and bias. And, yes, it does sound like eugenics.....Nazi eugenics!
The other day I saw a tiny girl ask her mom for help in the bathroom. The mother, speaking in small words, sounded less articulate than the young toddler but she looked well taken care of and groomed. Socially, there should always be a push to expect more. But I haven't faith in a parent test because I haven't faith in those who need a refresher course in how to say no to corruption.
Here I am evading "cope with it mechanisms", in order to pull out enough "standing points concepts" so that I may address a few political issues with congress. I am preparing myself for asking them not to do wrong. I live in a social dynamic of individuals--some courageous and pivotal while others are too complacent. Within this dynamic, a dynamic that is conditioned to ask congress not to do wrong, I am surrounded by those who expect individuals to pass a parent test.
gothatfunk, your comparison of the idea of deciding who should have kids and eugenics is nor far off. Plato wrote in "The Republic" - embraced by eugenics proponents - that in an ideal state, parents should bear children for the state for a prescribed number of years, and he further wrote that any woman over 40 who conceived should abort. Aristotle also promoted abortion as a means of population control, limiting the number of children parents could have with further pregnancies terminated.
I'd vote for a parenting course/class and test to pass before being allowed to have a kid. People who don't take it don't get to have a child.
But a general disallowance for people with whatever personal trait that's "unpopular"? That's indeed eugenics. 1984 incoming !
I often say the line adressed in the description, but mostly out of anger and not really serious. Although... I really don't want Kirk Cameron or Ray Cumfart to reproduce (more) *cough* I'm sry, I'm a bigot :>
That's a brilliant idea. Except ... I heard a child psychologist who described their experience with children.
Who would deny a child psychologist the right to have children? Surely they know about raising kids! She had her first kid, and learned that she didn't know as much as she thought. After her third child, all her training in child psychology taught her nothing at all! So what class can teach you how to raise a child?
@LeksServices: You surely have a different idea concerning the depth of that test. I wasn't aiming that deeply. It should basically consist of basic stress tests, checking for violent tendencies, serious drug addiction, just basic extreme psychological stuff that could ruin a child's life. Nothing remotely close to "being the perfect parent" because as you say: who can claim to know how to be ?
Ahh. Okies. Well I kinda' can see that point. Personally, I think we should be able to look up people's histories so we know who not to get in to relationships with. Perhaps with that kind of test, we can avoid getting in to bad relationships, while avoiding obviously bad parents as well?
@LeksServices: well. We actually do that. You see what that can lead to. You know how love can be... make blind and stuff. Plus people can be deceitful at first and/or change. You can marry a good partner who turns out to be abusive, egoistic and opressive, no matter if female or male. Then there's manipulation and/or "genuine" love. But still the person is a bastard. Get my point ? "Carefully picking partners" is not a guarantee to have a healthy relationship. And thus be healthy parents.
Oddly, there is a book that talks all about that. It's by a long-time relationship counsellor who noticed there was a need to explain some things. She was writing about "how to determine if a person should stay in a relationship or not," but accidently also described how to have a near perfect one. Basically, you do everything you can to make it "too good to leave," and your partner does the same, it proves a great relationship. On the other hand, it also shows when you must leave. ^_^
Honestly, if you want a kid that bad, adopt. You're not increasing population, AND you're giving someone a home, at the cost of your genes not spreading.
I have recently discovered Doug Stanhope via Charlie Brooker's Newswipe, and was left with tis thought after the last episode, "don't fuck in the front hole and abortion is green."
I'm in favour of parental tests for all soon-to-be parents. It should kick in as soon as a doctor confirms pregnancy (and the woman decides she will keep it).
The test should involve emotional aptitude, stress control, as well as an understanding of basics skill sets such as budgetting, baby care etc.
If you pass the test you get your baby diploma/licence but if you don't you get a case worker and you take classes. This would link up with current social services. You get supervised in essence.
At any point a licence holder can ask for such a superviser too, if they are having trouble.
I grew up in a single parent household on a council estate. My mother had to make choices that would make you weep. She did okay with very little help. However a lot of the kids I went to school with were not so lucky.
Parents dosing their kids with Calpol so they can go out to the disco and to keep the kid from crying when they brought strangers back.
Or think that screaming 'SHUT UP' at a child every five minutes is teaching them 'discipline'.
Some are lazy, some just can't cope. They all could do with a hefty dose of education before their child arrives so that their children do not suffer because of parental inadequacies.
So bring on the testing and the parental licencing - but we don't need any bans or sterilisation, thank you.
They'll use the schools based on conformity to decide. Who can or cannot have children. And unless I miss my guess who lives or who dies. At this point I would point out Albert Einstein failed math and dropped out of school. That's eugenics it's been here before and it's coming back..
Fight ,resist, scream bloody murder..
I hope I haven;t offended anyone. But you hit the nail on the head. And I felt I had to rant. Sorry..
yes I know exactly what your saying. I have in the past had moments where I have thought how can just anyone be allowed to have kids, but my position has always been choice , and giving ANYONE that much power over what I can and cannot do with my body scares the crap out of me. So you pretty much summed up exactly what i think about the whole subject ...sigh
Unfortunately the right to have kids is being challenged on many fronts. Eugenics is happening everywhere. (Food additives,vaccines,water additives reduce fertility damage dna.) And people are being brainwashed to this effect. Some children are abused or neglected but far more often than than not. The abuse visited on them by the state. Is often far worse than that inflicted by any parent.... Ay Copenhagen the free world narrowly missed a one child policy.
Paul, you talk about "dangerous thinking" at the end of your video description. You can derive a random danger for any kind of thinking. Are you making the case that having some system for regulating human births is by necessity MORE dangerous than having no regulation at all? You can only compare and contrast if you consider both cases.
I also think it's irresponsible to start tossing the word eugenics about, without establishing that you are talking about inheritable characteristics.
Political inclinations, education, and financial situation are not genetically determined, and even if society filters against these attributes (read: not 'traits') it does not mean genetic screenings are next.
I know what you are asking - "who decides what is undesirable" - but let's not invoke the slippery slope fallacy.
IMO the slippery slope argument is not universally invalid. this is a good example. any arguments about criteria for allowing people to become parents could be equally applied to genetics, or so it seems to me.
perhaps instead of the word 'inevitable', the word 'likely' is more apt.
True, but if you imagine a scenario where reproduction is regulated you would almost certainly be imagining legislation, which would very likely be highly self-controlled. In other words, it would prescribe some criteria and expressly forbid others.
The question as to how those criteria would be chosen is entirely valid, but I don't see inherent grounds for assuming that prescribing one set of criteria makes any other set just as likely as candidates.
Society is becoming more liberal. The way I see it is that's 10 kids that will become Atheist after seeing the backwardness of their mother compared to more understanding parents. Perhaps new George Carlins?
Maybe everyone should have the chance to have one child, a "trial" child. If they do well through the terrible twos etc, and are stable and the child is well cared for during say, the first 5 years of life, they get to have another one? I don't know. I agree that an arbitrary test would take away rights, but there are a LOT of stupid people breeding. I don't have the solution. Interesting video, Paul!
There is no cure for stupidity there is a cure for ignorance. I find there is a big difference between someone who is simply ignorant and someone who is out right stupid.
Primary the difference is simply people who are stupid tend to be willingly so and don't ever plan on changing.
some people are good with small kids, but crap with adolescents/teens. some people have no aptitude for babies, but are okay once the kids are old enough to understand things a bit, & so on.
in my estimation, its a rare person indeed who is really good at all phases of parenting. also, every kid is different, the first one could be easy, the next one a monster, regardless of similar parenting.
The different skills thing reminds me of some stuff that's been coming at me lately - growing social isolation despite a growing population, lack of touch, TV babysitters, marginalized old and young and disabled. I think we need to take a hard look at the advantages of a tribal structure and apply some ideas to our families and communities. My Filipina friend knows her entire gigantic family. I go to a party and ache a little for the kind of relationships they have. (cont)
Sorry, it's late and I'm ramblin and tearing up a bit. The kin group idea - having 3-4 generations for kids to relate to and learn from and feel loved by is so very appealing, and then as a part of a community...
Would this even be constitutional?? I don't think it would. I think as a species we have evolved to much in this area. Parenting is not inate for us as it is for our cousins. I think that the biggest problem lies in our education system. While we teach our children to read, write, do math and maybe some science we fail to teach them practical applications for life. Most reach their majority without knowing how to manage their budget much less how to have a healthy family life.
i agree. parenthood classes seem more applicible to later life than a lot of courses that are required.
as for the constitutional question, we've been here before. back in the 30s, some states were forcing people (mentally handicapped etc) to be sterilised, and even if you had a mentally handicapped person in your family, you might have been denied a marriage licence on that basis, which in those days pretty much meant you couldn't have kids.
The last, legal, forced sterilization was in 1972, in the US. But forced sterilization still continues, as does forced abortions. It's just done with a wink and a nod, and nothing is "official".
Yeah, this is something I've thought about too. It's even unethical to incentivize reproductive decisions to some extent. A few years ago someone was paying drug addicted women to get tubal ligation.
Besides, if we can't create a reliable system to correctly identify child abuse and act in the children's best interest, how can we properly predict who will be a good parent? We don't even get foster care right. I think bad parenting is one piece of a bigger problem.
I agree with your stance on this issue. A license to raise kids, seriously? Well, if there is such a "license" to raise kids, the individual ought to be their own officer to give themselves such a license. As for me, its only a matter of time before I decide to apply for that "license." I am avoiding it at all costs at the moment. Nothing personal, I like kids, I just love living alone, enjoying my youth, my independence, Im not ready to share my life with a wife and kids right now.
90% of child abusers are family members. its the unconvicted ones who are the problem. there's no reason to think requiring licensing would sift out paedo parents.
as for convicted paedos, i'm pretty sure they already lose their kids when they go to prison.
its an interesting question. my gut reaction is to say, no, they shouldn't. but i could NEVER support forced sterilisation, on anyone. i suppose each case would have to be considered on its own merits. you couldn't have a one size fits all rule.
paedophiles *should not be* released from custody if it is deemed they still present a danger.
yes i see the irony of pro-choice parents expecting the same decision to be made of any parents who are unready or who can ill afford a baby. I can also understand the animosity of anyone who has chosen to abort towards those who choose to deliver a baby without the ability or the necessary means for support.
I don't think there's any viable way to control procreation that wouldn't be prone to complete failures of ethics because of the reasons given in the video.
It's been tried before, like when white Australians forcefully stole children from aboriginal Australians because Aborigines were considered 'unfit' parents.
At the same time I wish there were a way, because there are many parents who don't deserve their children and whose parenting constitutes a violation of the children's basic rights.
That doesn't sound like eugenics. It IS eugenics. And if you're surprised that "progressive" minded people seem to, or actually, advocate it. Remember that it was the very same "progressive" movement, using the very same arguments, that started the eugenics programs around the world. That gave rise to a new level, and definition, of evil.
But then, an act is never evil to the one doing it. Especially when the intentions are good and pure.
i do recall me saying pretty much everything you were talking about,.. of course i went to an extreme but my over all opinion is still the same
i think China has it right, child birth should be limited and licensed, the world population is to high, people are starving, there are children who could use being adopted, parents living off the government, Children raising children, and poor parents
not counting the selfish, even the rich that just want babies then they get raised by nannies
should we also regulate the ages of people having children? what characteristics would prevent someone from being licensed? what, if any, genetic traits should be encouraged? should anyone be denied the right of reproduction on any genetic criteria? should we regulate the ratio of males to females?
setting the criteria for these and other considerations is incredibly problematic, and contrary to principles of liberty.
personally i would mostly just worry about a limit of 1-2 children, genetic traits, boy girl, doesn't matter to me. an age to have children maybe 18-21.
the license would have to be some sort of point system, criminal record, education, projected income, environment, current number of children. etc
i'd love to be on board with you, but the planet is only so big, people are dieing and a lot more will die if an attempt isn't made, all i know is money shouldn't be the sole criteria
as for the argument that the planet is unable to support humanity, if we distributed resources more equitably, the problems you mentioned in the first comment would be seriously diminished.
at present, the USA, with 5% of the world's population, consumes 40% of it resources. this disparity accounts for more problems than population growth.
i do agree that some of my view points can be over come through other means, however i don't see many individuals sense of entitlement going away anytime soon, sure they want this and that,.. but do they need it? a lot just think of themselves vs what is best for there children, and then the ones that just want babies and become disinterested when they become older.
add a psych test to the licensing point system haha
Very true, I just wish people would THINK before they bring life into this world. It's a lot of responsibility to take on. Having 10 children is a bit much in my opinion. Some people can juggle all those children, but I really have to wonder though, having that many kids is like asking for abuse. Just my personal opinion I believe in freedom of choice. I don't have children because I'm not able to provide for them.
It would be utterly unmanageable, but what you can do is have a one child policy similar to China, they're free to have as many kids as they like but after 1 the State doesn't support the Second, third etc.
There needs to be a cap on population growth soon or we will end up having resource wars, Iraq and Afghanistan will look minor in comparison.
kassie is not going to have an easy time getting a man. by her own admission, she wants a man to be dominant, head of the household etc, but also be respectful and tolerant of her being outspoken and opinionated. in my experience, dominant men tend to want more passive personality types than Kassie.
some of the poorest people have been the best parents, and some of the wealthiest, the worst. i cant imagine setting a criteria to meet. to invade and impede on someones personal freedoms? no. however, as a society i would love to see support offered. we offer it for everything else. almost like therapy. and offer extended classes, so as your children grow and you face new challenges, you can seek some sort of help outside of self help books. i wish there were better resources. 5 stars :)
I recently made such a comment myself, in jest, on BTL's vid about gay couples raising kids.
I do it to remind those who would deny that right to gays what it might feel like to have that right denied to themselves.
You're right. In the end it has to be a basic human right until we get ourselves in so much trouble we need to do something to curb the population or die and kill our planet.
Oh it's all very offensive. It doesn't sound like eugenics, it is eugenics.
A lot of young people are taking on these views. Unfortunately we've got the radical left wing on one side, and the fascists on the other. They're both authoritarian, and no doubt their ideas are fringe. But it's a disturbing ideology and I hope that it doesn't gain popularity.
We have a population problem though, that's for certain. But people have to decide on their own if they are going to pass on their genes.
It's all about intervening to stop negligence and abuse from being handed from one generation to the next, and maybe including some sort of training in schools for both boys and girls on not just the facts of life, but on child welfare. I know this happens in some places.
I don't care who has kids, but I think if you're living off of government money and continue to have kids you should be prevented from having more kids.
I'm sorry, but their right to have kids does not extend to making other people *literally* pay for their actions.
i dont know, thats all crazy talk really, i guess it comes down to education but it does irk me seeing these young mothers blatantly having kids just so they can get a house off the council and all the benefits. they really do. its sick.
i have seen girls recommend pregnancy to their friends for that exact reason. i'm in favour of the benefits system, and it beggars belief that people would actually bring a life into the world to exploit it. still, since the system needs to exist, i'm at a loss as to how to mitigate against that kind of flagrantly irresponsible abuse.(?)
it is a minefield of a discussion topic.. tho of course i have come into contact with soo many people who just should have had their bits tied up for the greater good.. a tricky one indeed. impossible to actually implement. i do think that maybe a deterrant to having over a certain number of kids should exist tho. i mean why not? maybe like take away tax benefits if you have over 3 kids? but then what if u have quituplets? or two sets of twins? lol!.......
I agree with you. However, it can be really hard to watch women I know who smoke like a freight train when they're pregnant, have five kids, and then fail to teach, encourage, or even be nice to their kids.
Perhaps everyone should be required to take a class.....at least to get some tools. I don't know......Teaching people how to deal with kids would be a really good idea though.
indeed, education seems like a good approach. but you still run into the problem as to whose standards should apply. for example, i dare you to do a video stating your opinions on corporal punishment. some people will tell you its NEVER ok to strike a child, some will say its ok under certain criteria, and some will insist kids need firm discipline, including being caned.
my point is, even basic parenting concepts are seriously contentious.
I don't mean just about discipline, but ideas how to handle different stages of development. Everyone's ideas will be different, yes, but maybe it would help? I don't know......there are just a lot of messed up people.
yeah, i just used discipline as an example. but its almost any aspect of parenting. you would not believe the amount of flack i took for raising my kids to be vegetarian, for instance.
some parents want to give their kids everything, some want them to learn the value of money by making them work for it. who has the right approach?
parenting skills also differ as children develop. someone may be a great parent when their kid is little, but crap at dealing with the teen years...
I guess I would more than likely just tell the parents that they need to take an active interest in their kids' lives and be actual parents rather than just a cook or a pal....or let the tv teach them things.
I did a video like this a long time ago. Its disgusting that people think they have a right to tell others whether or not they can have children. The right to have/not have kids is the result of a long struggle. How many women were forced sterilized in the US prior to the reproductive rights movement? Women are still sterilized without their consent all over the world. Its a serious human rights issue.
This has been flagged as spam show
people who have children are fucking disgusting.
korabooyahtribe 5 months ago in playlist Population issues
Also if you have a test, there WILL be ways around it
snakebitgoat 6 months ago
All I'm gonna say is if people have a right to have kids, that would mean that convicted child rapists also have that right. These are people who need their dicks cut off or their cunts concreted up!!!
No, people do not automatically have a right to have kids. It's an honor, a privilege... it should be earned!
MulletPuppet 10 months ago
WHY is there not greater focus on the fact that procreation of our species at this point is profoundly selfish with regards to the non-sustainability of our over crowded planet?
IS it a willful blindness of an inconvenient truth, or remarkable arrogance of the "entitled" breeders that drives this ignorance?
WHAT will it take to have the breeders show some restraint, and to have them recognize that they are quickening the starvation of those already on this shrinking planet?
whyiswhat 2 years ago
When I was in high school, we had a family life class. It was all about budgeting, wedding planning, family planning, raising children. We all got a raw egg that was our "baby". We had to take care of it for two weeks and write a report containing expenses, how we cared for the baby, what we did with it, who babysat, etc. It was very lightweight compared to the real information needed to care for a child. And, like most public school electives, that class has fallen due to budget cuts.
debbieomi 2 years ago
Every day I see examples of children being parented by people by adults lacking the basic skills to do so. I'm not talking about whether to spank or not, allowing a kid to backtalk or any of that. I see kids coming to school in sub zero weather wearing no snow pants, no hats, no mittens... I see children walk into the school carrying a can of mountain dew and a sweet pastry and calling that breakfast.
debbieomi 2 years ago
Education is needed and it has to start before people have their first child.
I have to state that I am 100% for mandatory classes for any person who will be parenting (this is biological or adoptive parents). Cover the basics of how to care for a child and their physical well being. Have classes every one or two years attending to the next phase of childhood. I hate to have more government involvement in our lives, but I see too many children who need more protection.
debbieomi 2 years ago
Brilliant, I don;t think I've ever looked at this subject in quiet that way.
vearheart42 2 years ago
I agree that many people out here who are parents may not be qualified to do so, but that is comparing my thoughts on good parenting with theirs, and they may not agree with mine, etc. There really is no true way to go about something like this, unfortunately.
GREAT vid!
choirgrrl 2 years ago
Even with all the problems you cite, it may be that at some point our survival as a species may be contingent upon us placing some restrictions on reproductive freedom. Overpopulation and life extension may make the issue of paternity licenses necessary. In fact we may be close to needing to do so now. We could already have a population that exceeds the sustainable resource load on our environment. In the competition between species survival vs. human rights is side with survival.
BigDickandLittleJon 2 years ago
@BigDickandLittleJon that all sounds reasonable except for "In the competition between species survival vs. human rights is side with survival."
soooooo, you've watched over 40,000 thousand videos in less than a year?
fatpius 2 years ago
The problem, for me, is people confuse reproduction with parenting. They think that because they can physically create a child that is all it takes to be a parent. So no, do not control who may have children but I would be fine with instituting a policy of mandatory parenting classes. You have a child, you have to take a class on how to care for it, maybe with periodic refresher courses for challenges that come with the different ages.
Lynpgz 2 years ago
Did a bit of investigating, and found David Attenborough's recent doco about how many people this planet can sustain. Predictably shocking. The doco came up with education as the most effective solution overall. And the solution is to STOP reproducing. I've known this for years & decided NOT to "excercise my right to have a child." To me it's not your right. It is a selfish decision, to insist you are entitled to reproduce on this planet after all the years of abuse by humans.
Horseplay71 2 years ago
I'll set the criteria if no one wants too step up to the plate.
garytheagnostic 2 years ago
Everyone should stop focusing on who shouldn't have children and focus on who has children.For example, My neighbors have had their children taken by CPS 3 times in the past 5 years I have lived here. I know they have had to be taken away many more times. The fathers record, I looked it up, its full of domestic charges among other things. How can we continue to let these people get their children back? Let's focus on that.
sarathegriffin 2 years ago
GTF, could you name a cirxcumstance excluding sexual or physical abuse where you think it would be appropriate for the removal of a child? I personally think miscare is also excluded in violent conduct as well. Personally I think people most of the time try to do their best.
bossman103 2 years ago
The desire for easy answers can lead to appalling suggestions. I can understand the aesthetic appeal of simple statements. I can understand the confidence inspiring power of science. However, I would feel much better if the individuals so bolstered by the benefits of modern science knew what it means to win knowledge from Universe, or had to live with consequences of such blanket policies. Is wisdom really so self-evident? I know the perpetrators of so many forms of human sacrifice thought so.
UnhappyTestTubeBaby 2 years ago
"pro-choice; go figure"
Well, we have, figured.
Have you done the math?
Please! Go figure!
The Most IMPORTANT Video You'll Ever See
6A1FD147A45EF50D
DonQuixotedeKaw 2 years ago
Don, I'm coming up with a malformed URL using this. Will you check as retype it, please?
Thanks.
debbieomi 2 years ago
Sorry Paul, your empathy for the person, but not the species, is in dire error. Simply put, we either forge a way to make eugenics a fair & least brutal reality, as a species, or nature will brutally defend itself from a disease. The bio-web has no discrimination that humans might universally choose; we will simply be dead.
Overpopulation is not a nuisance, it is THE problem.
DonQuixotedeKaw 2 years ago 2
You influence many minds with your great empathy, and justly so.
Do not pave a road to a man made hell, with ill conceived good intentions.
Do not join the likes of Mother Teresa.
DonQuixotedeKaw 2 years ago
I agree with you on this. Once you start setting criteria and limiting who can and can not be a parent, you open up a whole can of criterias set on personal opinion and bias. And, yes, it does sound like eugenics.....Nazi eugenics!
ICharmaine 2 years ago
Oh btw--the mother refused to help the little girl.
dade7sreel 2 years ago
The other day I saw a tiny girl ask her mom for help in the bathroom. The mother, speaking in small words, sounded less articulate than the young toddler but she looked well taken care of and groomed. Socially, there should always be a push to expect more. But I haven't faith in a parent test because I haven't faith in those who need a refresher course in how to say no to corruption.
dade7sreel 2 years ago
Here I am evading "cope with it mechanisms", in order to pull out enough "standing points concepts" so that I may address a few political issues with congress. I am preparing myself for asking them not to do wrong. I live in a social dynamic of individuals--some courageous and pivotal while others are too complacent. Within this dynamic, a dynamic that is conditioned to ask congress not to do wrong, I am surrounded by those who expect individuals to pass a parent test.
dade7sreel 2 years ago
...I just realized the absurdity of using heavyweights like Plato and Aristotle in a discussion about kassiedill...
SmilingSkeptic 2 years ago
Yup!
Frequencitee 2 years ago
gothatfunk, your comparison of the idea of deciding who should have kids and eugenics is nor far off. Plato wrote in "The Republic" - embraced by eugenics proponents - that in an ideal state, parents should bear children for the state for a prescribed number of years, and he further wrote that any woman over 40 who conceived should abort. Aristotle also promoted abortion as a means of population control, limiting the number of children parents could have with further pregnancies terminated.
SmilingSkeptic 2 years ago
I'd vote for a parenting course/class and test to pass before being allowed to have a kid. People who don't take it don't get to have a child.
But a general disallowance for people with whatever personal trait that's "unpopular"? That's indeed eugenics. 1984 incoming !
I often say the line adressed in the description, but mostly out of anger and not really serious. Although... I really don't want Kirk Cameron or Ray Cumfart to reproduce (more) *cough* I'm sry, I'm a bigot :>
V0r4xiz 2 years ago
That's a brilliant idea. Except ... I heard a child psychologist who described their experience with children.
Who would deny a child psychologist the right to have children? Surely they know about raising kids! She had her first kid, and learned that she didn't know as much as she thought. After her third child, all her training in child psychology taught her nothing at all! So what class can teach you how to raise a child?
LeksServices 2 years ago
@LeksServices: You surely have a different idea concerning the depth of that test. I wasn't aiming that deeply. It should basically consist of basic stress tests, checking for violent tendencies, serious drug addiction, just basic extreme psychological stuff that could ruin a child's life. Nothing remotely close to "being the perfect parent" because as you say: who can claim to know how to be ?
V0r4xiz 2 years ago
Ahh. Okies. Well I kinda' can see that point. Personally, I think we should be able to look up people's histories so we know who not to get in to relationships with. Perhaps with that kind of test, we can avoid getting in to bad relationships, while avoiding obviously bad parents as well?
LeksServices 2 years ago
@LeksServices: well. We actually do that. You see what that can lead to. You know how love can be... make blind and stuff. Plus people can be deceitful at first and/or change. You can marry a good partner who turns out to be abusive, egoistic and opressive, no matter if female or male. Then there's manipulation and/or "genuine" love. But still the person is a bastard. Get my point ? "Carefully picking partners" is not a guarantee to have a healthy relationship. And thus be healthy parents.
V0r4xiz 2 years ago
Oddly, there is a book that talks all about that. It's by a long-time relationship counsellor who noticed there was a need to explain some things. She was writing about "how to determine if a person should stay in a relationship or not," but accidently also described how to have a near perfect one. Basically, you do everything you can to make it "too good to leave," and your partner does the same, it proves a great relationship. On the other hand, it also shows when you must leave. ^_^
LeksServices 2 years ago
You might be able to make an argument on the basis of income, but that's extremely iffy as well.
mbarbarelli 2 years ago
Honestly, if you want a kid that bad, adopt. You're not increasing population, AND you're giving someone a home, at the cost of your genes not spreading.
TookiGuy 2 years ago
I have recently discovered Doug Stanhope via Charlie Brooker's Newswipe, and was left with tis thought after the last episode, "don't fuck in the front hole and abortion is green."
Horseplay71 2 years ago
i get to set the criteria. and i say we stop breeding for at least 5 years.
thisis3d 2 years ago 2
I'm in favour of parental tests for all soon-to-be parents. It should kick in as soon as a doctor confirms pregnancy (and the woman decides she will keep it).
The test should involve emotional aptitude, stress control, as well as an understanding of basics skill sets such as budgetting, baby care etc.
If you pass the test you get your baby diploma/licence but if you don't you get a case worker and you take classes. This would link up with current social services. You get supervised in essence.
AnonEyeMouse 2 years ago
At any point a licence holder can ask for such a superviser too, if they are having trouble.
I grew up in a single parent household on a council estate. My mother had to make choices that would make you weep. She did okay with very little help. However a lot of the kids I went to school with were not so lucky.
Parents dosing their kids with Calpol so they can go out to the disco and to keep the kid from crying when they brought strangers back.
Parents who put cigs above baby food etc...
AnonEyeMouse 2 years ago
Or think that screaming 'SHUT UP' at a child every five minutes is teaching them 'discipline'.
Some are lazy, some just can't cope. They all could do with a hefty dose of education before their child arrives so that their children do not suffer because of parental inadequacies.
So bring on the testing and the parental licencing - but we don't need any bans or sterilisation, thank you.
AnonEyeMouse 2 years ago
They'll use the schools based on conformity to decide. Who can or cannot have children. And unless I miss my guess who lives or who dies. At this point I would point out Albert Einstein failed math and dropped out of school. That's eugenics it's been here before and it's coming back..
Fight ,resist, scream bloody murder..
I hope I haven;t offended anyone. But you hit the nail on the head. And I felt I had to rant. Sorry..
OldClay2 2 years ago
yes I know exactly what your saying. I have in the past had moments where I have thought how can just anyone be allowed to have kids, but my position has always been choice , and giving ANYONE that much power over what I can and cannot do with my body scares the crap out of me. So you pretty much summed up exactly what i think about the whole subject ...sigh
nelliediddle 2 years ago 2
I think most people are not really serious when they make that comment. At least I really hope not.
pkingo1 2 years ago
Unfortunately the right to have kids is being challenged on many fronts. Eugenics is happening everywhere. (Food additives,vaccines,water additives reduce fertility damage dna.) And people are being brainwashed to this effect. Some children are abused or neglected but far more often than than not. The abuse visited on them by the state. Is often far worse than that inflicted by any parent.... Ay Copenhagen the free world narrowly missed a one child policy.
OldClay2 2 years ago
Paul, you talk about "dangerous thinking" at the end of your video description. You can derive a random danger for any kind of thinking. Are you making the case that having some system for regulating human births is by necessity MORE dangerous than having no regulation at all? You can only compare and contrast if you consider both cases.
starfedrogue 2 years ago
I also think it's irresponsible to start tossing the word eugenics about, without establishing that you are talking about inheritable characteristics.
Political inclinations, education, and financial situation are not genetically determined, and even if society filters against these attributes (read: not 'traits') it does not mean genetic screenings are next.
I know what you are asking - "who decides what is undesirable" - but let's not invoke the slippery slope fallacy.
starfedrogue 2 years ago
good points all.
IMO the slippery slope argument is not universally invalid. this is a good example. any arguments about criteria for allowing people to become parents could be equally applied to genetics, or so it seems to me.
perhaps instead of the word 'inevitable', the word 'likely' is more apt.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
True, but if you imagine a scenario where reproduction is regulated you would almost certainly be imagining legislation, which would very likely be highly self-controlled. In other words, it would prescribe some criteria and expressly forbid others.
The question as to how those criteria would be chosen is entirely valid, but I don't see inherent grounds for assuming that prescribing one set of criteria makes any other set just as likely as candidates.
starfedrogue 2 years ago
I hope we don't get a human race of idiots and criminals in the future, due to massive parenting failure! :-D
Pungopingu 2 years ago
A license to have childeren is a vry small step from a license to have sex...Have those people thought about that??
peqdf 2 years ago
We already deny people the right to have kids retroactivly, removing children from people who have shown themselves unfit.
Unfortunately, this is the best way to do it, precisely because of the points you make.
I expect most of the comments are made out of frustration, and not an actual desire to see parenting licenses.
APDurrant 2 years ago
I think people who made those comments, predominantly made them knowing it is not a viable option.
Just venting a frustration at the amount of child abuse at the expense of parents who confuse their children as their possessions.
fantasy0coach 2 years ago
that is likely the case. still, i'd been hearing this kind of thing more and more, so felt it a good idea to provide a pause for thought.
thanks for watching! :-)
gothatfunk 2 years ago
Ya the biggest problem with this is where exactly do you draw the line. Another great video that mirrors my own thoughts.
Arikiel 2 years ago
Great video GTF. I couldn't said it better myself.
kelliko70 2 years ago
I think it will eventually work itself out either through education or evolution, in the long run it's win win!
0pnMnded 2 years ago
Ozric tentacles. Use a condom or a diaphragm? You Eugenicist! Eugenics isn't inherently "evil". I don't think you mean to imply that.
Mephistophilus 2 years ago
I agree. There would be no way to be able to tell if someone would be a good parent anyway.
I do think most people say it in jest though. ^.^
Lovingdoubt 2 years ago 2
I think a better philosophy would be regulating what kind of crap parents can fill their kids heads with.
dannypantsgm 2 years ago
Society is becoming more liberal. The way I see it is that's 10 kids that will become Atheist after seeing the backwardness of their mother compared to more understanding parents. Perhaps new George Carlins?
Dall5000 2 years ago 2
Maybe everyone should have the chance to have one child, a "trial" child. If they do well through the terrible twos etc, and are stable and the child is well cared for during say, the first 5 years of life, they get to have another one? I don't know. I agree that an arbitrary test would take away rights, but there are a LOT of stupid people breeding. I don't have the solution. Interesting video, Paul!
-Modias
InModiasWeTrust 2 years ago
mmm. but the cure for stupidity is education, not sterilisation.
as a pro-choice advocate, i'm surprised you'd be willing to consider any governmental/societal interference in an individual's reproductive rights.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
There is no cure for stupidity there is a cure for ignorance. I find there is a big difference between someone who is simply ignorant and someone who is out right stupid.
Primary the difference is simply people who are stupid tend to be willingly so and don't ever plan on changing.
darkdragonsoul99 2 years ago
Education is the cure for stupidity.
exacerbatedtaboo 2 years ago
you can not educate someone who refuses to learn. It's not that they can't it's that they wont plan and simply.
darkdragonsoul99 2 years ago
also Matt, i'd offer this for you to consider:
some people are good with small kids, but crap with adolescents/teens. some people have no aptitude for babies, but are okay once the kids are old enough to understand things a bit, & so on.
in my estimation, its a rare person indeed who is really good at all phases of parenting. also, every kid is different, the first one could be easy, the next one a monster, regardless of similar parenting.
rights must be equal, or they are meaningless.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
so very true...
POLYMORPHLEGION 2 years ago
The different skills thing reminds me of some stuff that's been coming at me lately - growing social isolation despite a growing population, lack of touch, TV babysitters, marginalized old and young and disabled. I think we need to take a hard look at the advantages of a tribal structure and apply some ideas to our families and communities. My Filipina friend knows her entire gigantic family. I go to a party and ache a little for the kind of relationships they have. (cont)
durtygrrrl 2 years ago
Sorry, it's late and I'm ramblin and tearing up a bit. The kin group idea - having 3-4 generations for kids to relate to and learn from and feel loved by is so very appealing, and then as a part of a community...
best if I stop there *blush* goodnight:)
durtygrrrl 2 years ago
Would this even be constitutional?? I don't think it would. I think as a species we have evolved to much in this area. Parenting is not inate for us as it is for our cousins. I think that the biggest problem lies in our education system. While we teach our children to read, write, do math and maybe some science we fail to teach them practical applications for life. Most reach their majority without knowing how to manage their budget much less how to have a healthy family life.
KraiseeDAtheist 2 years ago
i agree. parenthood classes seem more applicible to later life than a lot of courses that are required.
as for the constitutional question, we've been here before. back in the 30s, some states were forcing people (mentally handicapped etc) to be sterilised, and even if you had a mentally handicapped person in your family, you might have been denied a marriage licence on that basis, which in those days pretty much meant you couldn't have kids.
eugenics is dangerous.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
The last, legal, forced sterilization was in 1972, in the US. But forced sterilization still continues, as does forced abortions. It's just done with a wink and a nod, and nothing is "official".
I think we hung Nazi's for less.
ravenslaves 2 years ago
good video,kids don't come with instructions and no one is ever ready to have kids.
ashatbulaparanormal 2 years ago
Yeah, this is something I've thought about too. It's even unethical to incentivize reproductive decisions to some extent. A few years ago someone was paying drug addicted women to get tubal ligation.
Besides, if we can't create a reliable system to correctly identify child abuse and act in the children's best interest, how can we properly predict who will be a good parent? We don't even get foster care right. I think bad parenting is one piece of a bigger problem.
durtygrrrl 2 years ago
well said.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I agree with your stance on this issue. A license to raise kids, seriously? Well, if there is such a "license" to raise kids, the individual ought to be their own officer to give themselves such a license. As for me, its only a matter of time before I decide to apply for that "license." I am avoiding it at all costs at the moment. Nothing personal, I like kids, I just love living alone, enjoying my youth, my independence, Im not ready to share my life with a wife and kids right now.
zmode82 2 years ago
You can be a parent as long as you can take care of you kid...
KaptajnKaffe 2 years ago
What about convicted pedophiles?
MaoistRebelNews 2 years ago
90% of child abusers are family members. its the unconvicted ones who are the problem. there's no reason to think requiring licensing would sift out paedo parents.
as for convicted paedos, i'm pretty sure they already lose their kids when they go to prison.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I meant conviced ones who go on to have kids. Should they be allowed to have children.
MaoistRebelNews 2 years ago
its an interesting question. my gut reaction is to say, no, they shouldn't. but i could NEVER support forced sterilisation, on anyone. i suppose each case would have to be considered on its own merits. you couldn't have a one size fits all rule.
paedophiles *should not be* released from custody if it is deemed they still present a danger.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
yes i see the irony of pro-choice parents expecting the same decision to be made of any parents who are unready or who can ill afford a baby. I can also understand the animosity of anyone who has chosen to abort towards those who choose to deliver a baby without the ability or the necessary means for support.
funkskull 2 years ago
I don't think there's any viable way to control procreation that wouldn't be prone to complete failures of ethics because of the reasons given in the video.
It's been tried before, like when white Australians forcefully stole children from aboriginal Australians because Aborigines were considered 'unfit' parents.
At the same time I wish there were a way, because there are many parents who don't deserve their children and whose parenting constitutes a violation of the children's basic rights.
churchofstfu 2 years ago
That doesn't sound like eugenics. It IS eugenics. And if you're surprised that "progressive" minded people seem to, or actually, advocate it. Remember that it was the very same "progressive" movement, using the very same arguments, that started the eugenics programs around the world. That gave rise to a new level, and definition, of evil.
But then, an act is never evil to the one doing it. Especially when the intentions are good and pure.
ravenslaves 2 years ago
well said mate.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
i do recall me saying pretty much everything you were talking about,.. of course i went to an extreme but my over all opinion is still the same
i think China has it right, child birth should be limited and licensed, the world population is to high, people are starving, there are children who could use being adopted, parents living off the government, Children raising children, and poor parents
not counting the selfish, even the rich that just want babies then they get raised by nannies
OccultistPriest 2 years ago
that's an interesting point of view.
should we also regulate the ages of people having children? what characteristics would prevent someone from being licensed? what, if any, genetic traits should be encouraged? should anyone be denied the right of reproduction on any genetic criteria? should we regulate the ratio of males to females?
setting the criteria for these and other considerations is incredibly problematic, and contrary to principles of liberty.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
personally i would mostly just worry about a limit of 1-2 children, genetic traits, boy girl, doesn't matter to me. an age to have children maybe 18-21.
the license would have to be some sort of point system, criminal record, education, projected income, environment, current number of children. etc
i'd love to be on board with you, but the planet is only so big, people are dieing and a lot more will die if an attempt isn't made, all i know is money shouldn't be the sole criteria
OccultistPriest 2 years ago
well i respect differing viewpoints.
as for the argument that the planet is unable to support humanity, if we distributed resources more equitably, the problems you mentioned in the first comment would be seriously diminished.
at present, the USA, with 5% of the world's population, consumes 40% of it resources. this disparity accounts for more problems than population growth.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
i do agree that some of my view points can be over come through other means, however i don't see many individuals sense of entitlement going away anytime soon, sure they want this and that,.. but do they need it? a lot just think of themselves vs what is best for there children, and then the ones that just want babies and become disinterested when they become older.
add a psych test to the licensing point system haha
OccultistPriest 2 years ago
Very true, I just wish people would THINK before they bring life into this world. It's a lot of responsibility to take on. Having 10 children is a bit much in my opinion. Some people can juggle all those children, but I really have to wonder though, having that many kids is like asking for abuse. Just my personal opinion I believe in freedom of choice. I don't have children because I'm not able to provide for them.
pixelatedxdeath 2 years ago
It would be utterly unmanageable, but what you can do is have a one child policy similar to China, they're free to have as many kids as they like but after 1 the State doesn't support the Second, third etc.
There needs to be a cap on population growth soon or we will end up having resource wars, Iraq and Afghanistan will look minor in comparison.
2DRonaldo 2 years ago
i bet most of these people werent dead serious...
anyway, we should keep on arguing with kassie so she cant get on getting babies
anom4lie 2 years ago
kassie is not going to have an easy time getting a man. by her own admission, she wants a man to be dominant, head of the household etc, but also be respectful and tolerant of her being outspoken and opinionated. in my experience, dominant men tend to want more passive personality types than Kassie.
she'll be a spinster for a long long time.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
Ann Coulter is going to have to retire someday.
UnhappyTestTubeBaby 2 years ago
some of the poorest people have been the best parents, and some of the wealthiest, the worst. i cant imagine setting a criteria to meet. to invade and impede on someones personal freedoms? no. however, as a society i would love to see support offered. we offer it for everything else. almost like therapy. and offer extended classes, so as your children grow and you face new challenges, you can seek some sort of help outside of self help books. i wish there were better resources. 5 stars :)
jakluk4 2 years ago
" wish there were better resources."
yeah, too bad there's not much profit in compassion.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I recently made such a comment myself, in jest, on BTL's vid about gay couples raising kids.
I do it to remind those who would deny that right to gays what it might feel like to have that right denied to themselves.
You're right. In the end it has to be a basic human right until we get ourselves in so much trouble we need to do something to curb the population or die and kill our planet.
zarkoff45 2 years ago
Oh it's all very offensive. It doesn't sound like eugenics, it is eugenics.
A lot of young people are taking on these views. Unfortunately we've got the radical left wing on one side, and the fascists on the other. They're both authoritarian, and no doubt their ideas are fringe. But it's a disturbing ideology and I hope that it doesn't gain popularity.
We have a population problem though, that's for certain. But people have to decide on their own if they are going to pass on their genes.
PurpleHoneyBear 2 years ago
It's all about intervening to stop negligence and abuse from being handed from one generation to the next, and maybe including some sort of training in schools for both boys and girls on not just the facts of life, but on child welfare. I know this happens in some places.
AuntieDiluvian 2 years ago
education is the only viable way of mitigating this problem, but even that is fraught with problems. bottom line though, education is vital.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
You are a philosopher supreme! You think about problems I wouldn't even dream of trying to solve.
bamboo4tameshigiri 2 years ago
sir, you flatter me. cheers.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I don't care who has kids, but I think if you're living off of government money and continue to have kids you should be prevented from having more kids.
I'm sorry, but their right to have kids does not extend to making other people *literally* pay for their actions.
Rithrandil 2 years ago
i hear that, its a big problem here too.
there's no easy answer, its a clear contradiction between rights.
benefit systems exist to mitigate against poverty and the knock on effects of crime. benefits aren't meant to become a lifestyle.
as i said, no easy answers.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
i dont know, thats all crazy talk really, i guess it comes down to education but it does irk me seeing these young mothers blatantly having kids just so they can get a house off the council and all the benefits. they really do. its sick.
oojamaflipper 2 years ago
i have seen girls recommend pregnancy to their friends for that exact reason. i'm in favour of the benefits system, and it beggars belief that people would actually bring a life into the world to exploit it. still, since the system needs to exist, i'm at a loss as to how to mitigate against that kind of flagrantly irresponsible abuse.(?)
gothatfunk 2 years ago
it is a minefield of a discussion topic.. tho of course i have come into contact with soo many people who just should have had their bits tied up for the greater good.. a tricky one indeed. impossible to actually implement. i do think that maybe a deterrant to having over a certain number of kids should exist tho. i mean why not? maybe like take away tax benefits if you have over 3 kids? but then what if u have quituplets? or two sets of twins? lol!.......
oojamaflipper 2 years ago
Eugenics fuck yeah.
macwild1234 2 years ago
I agree with you. However, it can be really hard to watch women I know who smoke like a freight train when they're pregnant, have five kids, and then fail to teach, encourage, or even be nice to their kids.
guildpactminish 2 years ago
i hear ya. i see people everyday behave in ways towards their kids that makes my blood boil.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
isn't that Communism? I just did a Video on God in the schools that you might appreciate.
Check my latest video.
Thanks!
FromOutsideTheBox 2 years ago
1984 - there is something in there about this
jmm1233 2 years ago
Perhaps everyone should be required to take a class.....at least to get some tools. I don't know......Teaching people how to deal with kids would be a really good idea though.
abbynormal0ne 2 years ago
indeed, education seems like a good approach. but you still run into the problem as to whose standards should apply. for example, i dare you to do a video stating your opinions on corporal punishment. some people will tell you its NEVER ok to strike a child, some will say its ok under certain criteria, and some will insist kids need firm discipline, including being caned.
my point is, even basic parenting concepts are seriously contentious.
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I don't mean just about discipline, but ideas how to handle different stages of development. Everyone's ideas will be different, yes, but maybe it would help? I don't know......there are just a lot of messed up people.
abbynormal0ne 2 years ago
yeah, i just used discipline as an example. but its almost any aspect of parenting. you would not believe the amount of flack i took for raising my kids to be vegetarian, for instance.
some parents want to give their kids everything, some want them to learn the value of money by making them work for it. who has the right approach?
parenting skills also differ as children develop. someone may be a great parent when their kid is little, but crap at dealing with the teen years...
gothatfunk 2 years ago
I guess I would more than likely just tell the parents that they need to take an active interest in their kids' lives and be actual parents rather than just a cook or a pal....or let the tv teach them things.
abbynormal0ne 2 years ago
I did a video like this a long time ago. Its disgusting that people think they have a right to tell others whether or not they can have children. The right to have/not have kids is the result of a long struggle. How many women were forced sterilized in the US prior to the reproductive rights movement? Women are still sterilized without their consent all over the world. Its a serious human rights issue.
nuclearnight 2 years ago
forced sterilisation is inhuman.
gothatfunk 2 years ago