• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Reproductive Rights

If you don't have a solution to enforce a married couple who get divorced to commit to raising a child jointly then how can you justify forced sterilization? It doesn't make sense.

I am all for stopping unwed pregnancies we have far to many children with no parents at all living in foster care or group homes. And I am all for welfare reform to make these single parents who live on welfare for life and basically make a career out of it. The answer is not a simple one and it certainly does not include forced sterilization. We may not have the right to reproduce and I agree with that. But no one has the right to force any kind of sterilization either. Because once you put something like that into effect what is the next thing that is going to be forced on us? I may not have the right to reproduce children but I do have the right to choose if I want to or not if I am capable physically and emotionally. And no I may not have been emotionally capable at the age of 18 but I am proof positive that people can get off of welfare and make something of their lives and so is my daughter. She is a single mother of two because of a divorce and the father is not helping her at all. I would love to be able to force him but other than having him thrown in jail where she would get no money from it there either, there is no real solution. And I think that is what we should focus on.
 
Last edited:
Ravynn123 said:
If you don't have a solution to enforce a married couple who get divorced to commit to raising a child jointly then how can you justify forced sterilization? It doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...
Wait, what?
If the proposed system can end all problems caused by unintended pregnancies, why is it not justified if it can't also end problems caused by intended pregnancies? That's like saying we shouldn't find a cure for stomach cancer because it doesn't also cure lung cancer.
No one program is going to be the magic cure to end everybody's problems forever. That doesn't mean that a program can't at least do a lot of good.

I may not have the right to reproduce children but I do have the right to choose if I want to or not if I am capable physically and emotionally.
Click to expand...

Wait, what? You may not have the right to reproduce, but you have the right to choose to reproduce? That doesn't make sense to me.
 
Last edited:
AvalonXQ said:
Wait, what?
If the proposed system can end all problems caused by unintended pregnancies, why is it not justified if it can't also end problems caused by intended pregnancies? That's like saying we shouldn't find a cure for stomach cancer because it doesn't also cure lung cancer.
No one program is going to be the magic cure to end everybody's problems forever. That doesn't mean that a program can't at least do a lot of good.



Wait, what? You may not have the right to reproduce, but you have the right to choose to reproduce? That doesn't make sense to me.
Click to expand...


How is forced sterilization going to cure the problem?

What gives you the right to force sterilization on me? That doesn't make sense to me...
 
If you go back and read post #56 you will see that 44% of single mothers are either separated or divorced and only 33% of single mothers have never been married.....


ETA: So your forced sterilization argument for unwed pregnancies just doesn't cut it when a majority of single mothers and single fathers are from divorce and separation.
 
Last edited:
Ravynn123 said:
How is forced sterilization going to cure the problem?
Click to expand...
Removing from everyone the ability to naturally become pregnant as a result of sex fixes the problem of unintended pregnancy.

What gives you the right to force sterilization on me?
Click to expand...

You have no right to have kids, and society has the right to prevent you from having kids.
 
Ravynn123 said:
If you go back and read post #56 you will see that 44% of single mothers are either separated or divorced and only 33% of single mothers have never been married.....
Click to expand...

Even if we translate that into "preventing all unintended pregnancies would only eliminate 33% of single mothers", why isn't that a considerable fix in and of itself? Especially since the 33% we're fixing are going to tend to be the youngest and least able to support themselves and their children, correct?
Again, fixing the teen mother epidemic may not also fix the divorce epidemic; I'm okay with acknowledging that they are different problems with different solutions.
 
AvalonXQ said:
Removing from everyone the ability to naturally become pregnant as a result of sex fixes the problem of unintended pregnancy.



You have no right to have kids, and society has the right to prevent you from having kids.
Click to expand...


That is your answer to forced sterilizations? LOL Epic Fail
 
Go back and read post #56 especially where it states that 79% of single mothers are gainfully employed.
 
AvalonXQ said:
An excellent, intelligent rebuttal. Very well done.
Click to expand...

I have given you intelligent rebuttal in everything you have said but you have not done the same. To say that society has the right to tell me or any woman that they have the right to choose for her is stupid.

Women have the right to decide if they want an abortion or not but they are then forced to be sterilized and do not have the right to choose without a license to have a baby??? Can you give me a logical answer to this question other than because that is How you feel or that is your belief...
I have already shown evidence that most single parent families are due to divorce. What evidence can you show me that will help me change my view about forced sterilization? Not your opinion but evidence....
 
Ravynn123 said:
I have given you intelligent rebuttal in everything you have said but you have not done the same. To say that society has the right to tell me or any woman that they have the right to choose for her is stupid.
Click to expand...
No, it's logical.
Society has neither unlimited resources nor the unrestricted responsibility to include any number of people that any individual chooses to produce. Making people is not a right, nor is raising them, as both involve a person other than yourself (namely, the one you're creating).

I have already shown evidence that most single parent families are due to divorce.
Click to expand...

No, you haven't. You showed a survey of all parents of children under 21 years of age who are not living with the other parent. The survey showed that 44% of the mothers are currently separated or divorced.
If you had been included in that survey, you would show up as separated or divorced despite the fact that you originally became a single mother due to an unintended unmarried pregnancy, not due to a divorce. This would be true even if the only child you had ever had was your first.

First, let's make sure that I have your claim straight. Are you claiming that my system should not be implemented because unintended pregnancies are not actually a major problem?
If this is your claim, what evidence do you have to support it?
 
Last edited:
AvalonXQ said:
No, it's logical.
Society has neither unlimited resources nor the unrestricted responsibility to include any number of people that any individual chooses to produce. Making people is not a right, nor is raising them, as both involve a person other than yourself (namely, the one you're creating).



No, you haven't. You showed a survey of all parents of children under 21 years of age who are not living with the other parent. The survey showed that 44% of the mothers are currently separated or divorced.
If you had been included in that survey, you would show up as separated or divorced despite the fact that you originally became a single mother due to an unintended unmarried pregnancy, not due to a divorce. This would be true even if the only child you had ever had was your first.

First, let's make sure that I have your claim straight. Are you claiming that my system should not be implemented because unintended pregnancies are not actually a major problem?
If this is your claim, what evidence do you have to support it?
Click to expand...

No I am saying that your system should not be implemented because you can not force something like sterilization on someone or at least should not be able to. What would your criteria be exactly as to who should be allowed to get a license to give birth and who shouldn't? I never claimed that unintended pregnancies are not a major problem. Do not put words in my mouth. I did say yes it is a problem but if you go back and actually read my post instead of picking and choosing which ones you want to comment on and ignoring the rest you will see that I stated that I do not agree with people on welfare as a career, deadbeat parents, and other problems that single parent homes can cause. I did however state that a better way to handle it would be change the current laws and that no there is not an easy answer to the problem. But, I do not believe that any answer includes forced sterilization. There has to be a better alternative than that That is what I am stating.
 
Oh and by the way if it was societies right to have forced sterilization then why is there this?
Forced sterilization has been recognized as crime against humanity if the action is part of a widespread or systematic practice by the Rome Statute Explanatory Memorandum, which defines the jurisdiction of the International Criminal Court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
 
AvalonXQ said:
No, it's logical.
Society has neither unlimited resources nor the unrestricted responsibility to include any number of people that any individual chooses to produce. Making people is not a right, nor is raising them, as both involve a person other than yourself (namely, the one you're creating).
Click to expand...
Could you list the rights people do have? In your country, at least.
 
AvalonXQ said:
No, it's logical.
Society has neither unlimited resources nor the unrestricted responsibility to include any number of people that any individual chooses to produce.
Click to expand...

You say this like the resources needed to raise a child are extracted from society as a whole. But they aren't in general, and they certainly don't need to be. They come primarily from whoever is having the child. That person is indeed free to allocate their resources as they see fit, and that includes using them to raise a child. Once the child is grown, they can contribute to society. The only burden that is ever placed on society as a whole is through entitlement programs that redirect resources to children or parents, but society doesn't need to offer such benefits. It may choose to, but it cannot fairly use that choice to deprive an individual of the choice of how they allocate their own resources.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom