Sterilize 'em?

Joined
2 Feb 2006
Messages
54,189
Reaction score
4,455
Location
Staffordshire
Country
United Kingdom
This story caught my eye.

Taking the child away was sad yes, but necessary? Maybe.

I see and hear news reports, particularly lately, that show evidence of far worse people than this particular mother. In the case of baby P for instance, it would have been much less cruel had this woman not given birth in the first place.

A while back a baby suffered a horrible death when the heroin addled mother allowed her baby to slip between the bed and a hot radiator.

Druggies, morons and violent psychopaths/paedophiles should be sterilized/castrated, no?
 
Sponsored Links
Druggies, morons and violent psychopaths/paedophiles should be sterilized/castrated, no?
And then you could move on to people with learning difficulties...(who some morons think are stupid)

Why not - it was done in sweden until the early eighties..

And you could of course take it a stage further, but a certain austrian corporal has already tried that.. ;)
 
And you could of course take it a stage further, but a certain austrian corporal has already tried that.. ;)

I was tempted to mention Adolf but decided the post was controversial enough.

If say a psychopathic paedophile meets a desperate drug addict then their combined evil could end up with them breeding a child purely for their depraved needs.
 
Druggies, morons and violent psychopaths/paedophiles should be sterilized/castrated, no?

There is an argument, in this overpopulated and increasingly dependent world, for a person to be means (financial, emotional, intellectual) tested for appropriateness of parenting a child.

But who would play god? I would, if the expenses package was right!
 
Sponsored Links
If say a psychopathic paedophile meets a desperate drug addict then their combined evil could end up with them breeding a child purely for their depraved needs.
They could, but then how big a step to the 16yr old wanting a child to get a council flat?...or a couple 'breeding for benefits' ?

The thought that 'some people shouldn't be allowed kids' is all well and good, but the problem comes with who makes the decision!
 
Druggies, morons and violent psychopaths/paedophiles should be sterilized/castrated, no?

There is an argument, in this overpopulated and increasingly dependent world, for a person to be means (financial, emotional, intellectual) tested for appropriateness of parenting a child.

But who would play god? I would, if the expenses package was right!

we used to have dog licences, John ?Cleese had a fish licence,
so whats wrong with a licence to breed :evil:
 
chemical castration of the populace with the antidote only handed out to those who pass the parenting criteria..
licence valid for one child only..
a second ( and final ) child could be applied for after 3 years, this waiting period could be suspended under exceptional circumstances such as the death of a child..
 
I don't think you would need to go as far as sterilizing them, there is a natural form of birth control which could be used :- Stop all their benefits and any financial help . Child benefit should be restricted to a maximum of 2 kids, any more you finance them yourselves, if you need a bigger house for your 11 kids go out and buy one
 
I once knew a (female) 'breeder' that had planned (and executed that plan) to have a large family.

She said that by having the children a certain ages, meant that the older ones could look after the younger ones, and that she would get shed-loads of benefit.

Win, win.

Luckily for her the older siblings were female, and her plan worked perfectly.

:(
 
I once knew a (female) 'breeder' that had planned (and executed that plan) to have a large family.
:(

I am no expert, but a single parent in receipt of Income Support with five children, could expect to receive £154.30 per week. Or £8,023.60 a year.

Not a lot, but then - they do not pay any rent or Council Tax!
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top