View Poll Results: Who, if anyone, should the State force on birth control?

Voters
100. You may not vote on this poll
  • The mentally retarded

    31 31.00%
  • Those with genetic diseases that will cost the State

    29 29.00%
  • Drug addicts

    35 35.00%
  • Child abusers

    36 36.00%
  • Those receiving government assistance (food stamps, welfare)

    41 41.00%
  • Those who've already had 2 or 3 kids (overpopulation)

    15 15.00%
  • Anyone failing a psychological test

    14 14.00%
  • Women over 35 (Higher rate of genetic anomalies)

    3 3.00%
  • Girls under 18

    21 21.00%
  • Forced birth control is a violation of basic human rights

    52 52.00%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 175

Thread: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

  1. #81
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    The mentally retarded 4 12.90%
    This is too broad. Much as I'd like to impose such a restriction, I think this gives too much latitude to the State and would allow them to abuse the law by expanding the definition of "mental retardation" to suit them-- much as they've done with the definition of "felony" in order to strip people of other rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Those with genetic diseases that will cost the State 3 9.68%
    Again, too broad.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Drug addicts 6 19.35%
    I agree with Jallman here, but believe this is better addressed under child abuse. Of course, I don't have any objection to stripping reproductive rights from drug-addicted men who have sired drug-addicted children by their drug-addicted mothers. Not sure how to address that properly, however.

    Might be one use for paternity tests that doesn't turn my stomach.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Child abusers 7 22.58%
    Absolutely. This should be standard procedure upon second conviction of child abuse. Possibly upon first conviction, but I think it might be better to allow people one chance to turn themselves around under State supervision.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Those receiving government assistance (food stamps, welfare) 7 22.58%
    As long as it is temporary and only for the duration of benefits; no "ten year plan" unless the form of sterilization is entirely temporary and is removed at State's expense when benefits cease.

    Before anyone accuses me of wanting to "weed out undesirables", which I've never denied to be part of my motivation, I'm currently applying for government benefits myself. I would be all too happy to submit myself to temporary sterilization until I'm capable of supporting myself again. It would save me the worry of reproducing accidentally, which in my current state I would consider unacceptale.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Those who've already had 2 or 3 kids (overpopulation) 2 6.45%
    Large families should be encouraged. If people can continue to support their family, they should absolutely be allowed to have as many children as they desire.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Anyone failing a psychological test 2 6.45%
    Which psychological tests are we talking about? What conditions should disqualify a person from having children? Like "mental retardation" above, this is far too broad and far too open to abuse of State discretion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Women over 35 (Higher rate of genetic anomalies) 0 0%
    There is a risk present, but it's overblown. It's no worse than the risk of first cousins marrying-- which is still legal in much of the world. The risk is also considerably reduced in women that have had several children prior to 35.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Girls under 18 1 3.23%
    This might not be a bad idea, but much of the problem with underaged girls having children is actually that they are unmarried and can't count on support from their families. Might as well suggest that women be required to use birth control until they are married-- and I'm not willing to support that.

    The age of legal adulthood should be lowered.

    Quote Originally Posted by Poll Options
    Forced birth control is a violation of basic human rights 20 64.52%
    I don't believe in human rights. Several of the items on this list are perfect examples of why.

  2. #82
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Quote Originally Posted by jallman View Post
    I don't agree that people receiving welfare should be forced to take birth control. That's where you are a crossing a line and widening lattitude from a "judicial response to a crime" to "stop the undesirables from breeding".
    It's not because they are undesirable. . . and it's only BC which is temporary.

    It is because they are currently not capable of caring for a new child - to the extreme that they need to get support from the government.

    If you're poor (like I use to be) and on welfare (again, like I was) - then any new children you might have while you're on the system will only burden you more - pregnancy costs money. Having children demands time, money and healthcare.

    Money isn't the only factor - the point of welfare is to temporarily assist people while they find a job so they become independent and care for family - even if it means they have to go to college first.

    Permitting people on welfare and other forms of assistance to have more children while receiving assistance will only make it that much more difficult for them to get on their own two feet and care for the children they *do* have.

    Most people receiving assistance only qualify because they *do* have children - the care is really more for the children than it is for the parent. (Single or couple) - so it makes no sense to permit them to have more kids while they already have children that they cannot care for.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  3. #83
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Quote Originally Posted by Scarecrow Akhbar View Post
    Hell no.

    I'm saying stupid people who make that argument are strangely on the other side of the bar when it comes to forced sterilization of citizens.

    As far as I'm concerned condemned murderers should be executed before the moon's phase is repeated. I don't care how.
    Actually, you are the only person who is making that stupid argument in this thread, only in reverse.

    You are making that argument against forced temporary sterilization, yet you are strangely on the other side of the bar when it comes to lethal injection of citizens.

    Why are you calling yourself a stupid person for your positions?
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  4. #84
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Redneck Riviera
    Last Seen
    07-09-11 @ 06:11 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,728

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Once someone has abused a child, sterilization and/or birth control should be mandatory. I'd include drug abusers (who use drugs while pregnant) in this category, as well.

    For those who are receiving financial benefits from the state (Aid for Dependent Chidlren), they should be required to be on birth control as long as they are receiving benefits, and if they become pregnant, their benefits should be curtailed. The whole point of AFDC is that it is geared towards providing for CHIDLREN. Allowing moms who are receiving AFDC to continue to produce offspring is counterintuitive to the purpose of AFDC. It is supposed to be a temporary measure for young children.
    Last edited by Catz Part Deux; 02-03-10 at 10:23 AM.

  5. #85
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    To further my point about BC being required for welfare I'll use my ex husband and his wife.

    When I was married to him we had 2 kids. . . he became a drug addict and an abuser, I left when our 2nd child was 6 days old - my ex didn't care to see the kids and I got my life back together.

    However, he never did get his life together. Though he was suppose to pay child support I simply didn't persue it because I knew he didn't have a job or the money - it was a waste of time and I didn't care at all.

    So years later he was out of jail, got a job, and then my state started to garnish his paycheck for child support (as they are required to do) - and soon after his wife called me to harass me about it.

    AT that point they had 4 kids and she was pregnant with her 5th one.

    Now - a former drug addict just starting to work and caring for 4 children with one on the way and a stay at home wife - all on welfare.

    Do you think they can or will ever be able to adequately care for their children?
    No, they won't. They have yet to do so, unfortunately for the children.

    Do you think she ever started taking birth control?
    No - she's currently pregnant with child #6.

    I, however, actually felt bad for all of his kids and had him sign off his parental rights to end the child support - sure, he still owes arreas (past due child support) from the time that he didn't work and the state didn't collect (legaly, I have no say in that - it's the state law).

    I have 4 children - and out of care and respect for them and our overall family I had a tubal and I will not have anymore children.
    Why?
    Not because I think children are horrible - but because that's what responsible people do - they try to care for the family they DO HAVE before making the family bigger and burdening or robbing their already-here children of things that they need.

    Like - I don't know - hmm - food, shelter, clothing, education.

    Without a decent job you cannot provide those things on your own.

    Now -do you think my ex and his wife will ever stop having children? No, I don't think so. They'll be the Duggars - only at least the Duggars are financially stable and *not* dependent on the government for support.

    My ex and his 6 kids and wife are not.

    She should be forced to be on BC if she wants to continue to receive state-assistance. . . and if they fail to care for hteir own children their children should be removed from them.

    You cannot care for your children and prove incapable of figuring out how to do it after years and years of continual state assistance - the state should be able to let you go from their burden.

    Howeve,r that's illegal - it is illegal for the state to deny food and shelter to any child who needs it. So the state is stuck and there's really nothing they can do about it unless federal mandates change.
    Last edited by Aunt Spiker; 02-03-10 at 10:19 AM.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  6. #86
    Sage
    Cephus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    29,803

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    I don't think anyone should be forced on birth control, although I think that encouraged birth control is fine. If you're getting money from the taxpayers, you have a responsibility to control yourself. That means not breeding when you cannot even afford to feed yourself. I'm entirely fine with saying that once a person goes on welfare, they will not get paid extra for additional mouths they generate to feed. Then it leaves the responsibility to the individual, not the state.
    There is nothing demonstrably true that religion can provide the world that cannot be achieved more rationally through entirely secular means.

    Blog me! YouTube me! VidMe me!

  7. #87
    Professor
    Baralis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    MO
    Last Seen
    12-05-17 @ 03:53 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,394
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Forced birth control is a violation of basic human rights

    Agreed, then again I do not believe mandatory taxes should be taken from some to pay for the responsibilities of others. This is a violation of basic rights imo.

  8. #88
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Last Seen
    06-29-10 @ 11:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    1,801

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Rev. Ted Haggart

  9. #89
    Cheese
    Aunt Spiker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Sasnakra
    Last Seen
    09-10-16 @ 06:10 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    28,433

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    Quote Originally Posted by Baralis View Post
    Agreed, then again I do not believe mandatory taxes should be taken from some to pay for the responsibilities of others. This is a violation of basic rights imo.
    I completely agree, here.

    Why can't the government have demands and expectations - when they demand and expect us to support everyone else?

    My tax money goes to support my ex's 6 children, his wife and himself.
    What did he do to deserve such widespread, open armed support?

    He became an abusive drughead - gee, how sweet.

    Oh wait, it's not open armed support, it's slit wrist support. I get the two mixed up sometimes. It's support by proxy.
    A screaming comes across the sky.
    It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.
    Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow

  10. #90
    Professor
    Layla_Z's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Last Seen
    05-31-17 @ 08:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    1,440
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Who, if anyone, should be put on State mandated birth control?

    I don't know about forced birth control, but as a foster parent I've seen some people who would make you in favor of it. One girl had 3 kids by age 21. All of them had been taken away. She said she wanted her tubes tied but medicaid wouldn't pay for it. She's had another child since and that child was taken by the state.

    She has let her medicaid lapse so the bills for her 3rd child were not covered. This child was born at 24 weeks and spent 4 months in the neonatal ICU.
    ~Fighting for peace is like screwing for virginity.
    ~I have as much authority as the Pope, I just don't have as many people who believe it.
    ~If all the world is a stage, where is the audience sitting?
    George Carlin

Page 9 of 18 FirstFirst ... 7891011 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •