Charity Pays Drug Addicts to Undergo Sterilization

[Solitaire]

Well, this isn't too controversial.

U.S. Woman Pays British Addicts to Not Have Kids - ABC News

 

[IndyDave1776]

I don't understand why any third party would find 'righteous indignation' in proactive prevention of children who are likely not entering good situations. My understanding is that abortion on demand is a widely cherished 'right' in Britain much as it is here. I would have to suppose that those who uphold abortion but criticize prevention must have a killing fetish.

 

[NYFelon]

Looks like I'm gonna need to keep that 10 foot pole jpeg on speed dial.

 

[cobber]

I'm not getting something here.

Voluntary sterilization = bad
Voluntary abortion = good (well, not voluntary on the part of the fetus)

So some choice is better than others?

I guess you can never have too many crack babies?

 

[rockhopper46038]

What a marvelous idea.

 

[poptab]

How is this controversial?

 

[Solitaire]

How is this controversial?

Some would argue that offering money to people who are at a "rock bottom" point in their lives to undergo sterilization is exploiting them. Basically, it's like saying, "You are a drug addict, you will always be a POS drug addict. Here's a little bit of cash, do us a favor and don't reproduce."

Personally, I think that private charities can do what they like with their money, but I can see how some may find this tasteless. Many drug addicts will never fully recover, but some do.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Some would argue that offering money to people who are at a "rock bottom" point in their lives to undergo sterilization is exploiting them. Basically, it's like saying, "You are a drug addict, you will always be a POS drug addict. Here's a little bit of cash, do us a favor and don't reproduce."

Personally, I think that private charities can do what they like with their money, but I can see how some may find this tasteless. Many drug addicts will never fully recover, but some do.

Reasonable enough explanation, but I have to wonder why it is that the same people who insist a person should be able to do whatever they want, no limits, object to something agreed to by all parties involved. If they are in such vulnerable condition how can that not be used to deny them access to the drugs they are abusing or mandate 'treatment'? Seriously, I consider it none of anyone else's business how a person chooses to live, even if self-destructive and consider most forms of 'treatment' to be useless as mammaries on a boar, but I digress. In the end, should we not allow (and demand) that people take responsibility for their own choices?

 

[poptab]

Some would argue that offering money to people who are at a "rock bottom" point in their lives to undergo sterilization is exploiting them. Basically, it's like saying, "You are a drug addict, you will always be a POS drug addict. Here's a little bit of cash, do us a favor and don't reproduce."

Personally, I think that private charities can do what they like with their money, but I can see how some may find this tasteless. Many drug addicts will never fully recover, but some do.

Is it not better than government forced sterilization?

1907

Indiana becomes the first state in the country to successfully pass a mandatory forced sterilization law, in this case impacting the "feebleminded" (mentally handicapped

 

[sadclownwp]

These people should be sainted.

 

[lucky4034]

I'd vote for this government program

 

[7urtle]

should never be a government option

 

[lucky4034]

This is spending that would save billions :lol:

 

[gungirl65]

I would much rather see someone make an informed choice to be sterilized as opposed to aborting a fetus. Prevention is so much more civilized than killing the unborn and silencing their voices.

Let's face it, drug addicts generally don't make very good parents. Besides the people who agree to be sterilized have already had kids and the opportunity to be neglectful parents.

Harris makes it clear that she's not forcing anyone to get sterilized, and everyone who's opted for sterilization in Project Prevention has already had children.

 

[steveh_131]

I don't think this is the most effective or humane way to spend charitable donations. I'd rather see the money spent to help these folks than to sterilize them.

But the beauty of liberty is that it doesn't matter what I think. It's a consensual contract and I have no problem with it.

 

[poptab]

I don't think this is the most effective or humane way to spend charitable donations. I'd rather see the money spent to help these folks than to sterilize them.

But the beauty of liberty is that it doesn't matter what I think. It's a consensual contract and I have no problem with it.

I think they have been trying this and it doesnt seem to work very well.

 

[gungirl65]

I don't think this is the most effective or humane way to spend charitable donations. I'd rather see the money spent to help these folks than to sterilize them.

But the beauty of liberty is that it doesn't matter what I think. It's a consensual contract and I have no problem with it.

So how many crack babies do you plan on adopting since we all know how effective rehab is?

 

[steveh_131]

So how many crack babies do you plan on adopting since we all know how effective rehab is?

Maybe someday.

I don't think there's a huge shortage of parents willing to adopt a baby.

And since you're on your high horse, I assume you also think that the best way to spend your charitable donations is to sterilize drug users? How much money have you sent to this charity so far?

 

[downzero]

Wow, welcome to Buck v. Bell, 1927.

 

[lucky4034]

I think they have been trying this and it doesnt seem to work very well.

You mean "WE" have been trying... but its turned out to be a huge waste of our taxpayer money all around.