Page 2 of 2 [ 20 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

the26thangel
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker
Yellow-bellied Woodpecker

Joined: 29 Nov 2015
Posts: 57
Location: Norman, OK

30 Nov 2015, 2:00 am

Also, for those people who are pro-population control. It's not appropriate to tell others not to reproduce because YOU don't think they should. If you think the population is too much to the point that you would kill others or children or sterilize people, then chances are, it's the people who are THAT cruel who need to not proliferate. IOW, too many people? Then you stop breeding. Be the one to make a change in the direction you think best. Yet, most people are NOT down for that. Therefore, if you can't even make that choice for yourself, then don't try to do it for others.



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,903
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

30 Nov 2015, 2:52 am

Kraichgauer wrote:
pawelk1986 wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
zer0netgain wrote:
I can't say I like "eugenics," but I've long passed the point of believing that reproduction is a human right.

There is so much evidence that letting humans reproduce just because they have functioning organs isn't sound policy. Lots of people who are unfit to be parents are producing kids who are neglected, lots of parents who will pass on genetic disorders choose to have children knowing of the risk of passing on those disorders, and frankly, we can't keep breeding like rats because the global population is only sustainable because technology makes it possible to feed everyone (and that could change overnight).

My biggest issue would be how to determine who should make the decision of a couple could have a kid or what the standards should be for determining if someone is fit to be a parent.


So you believe we Aspies shouldn't be allowed to pass along our "genetic disorder?" Well, too bad, so sad for you, because I already did.


That was good :mrgreen:

But the truth is that some syndromes can be transmitted genetically.

For example, my mother thinks my father, who died in 2002 due to cardiomyopathy, also suffered from Asperger's, but in the 70s and 80s in communist Poland, no one had heard of such a thing as Autism or Asperger Syndrome.

My father was a very busy, it was just a workaholic, than it was a very meticulous and precise, he had quite specific, sometimes macabre sense of humor, for example, my dad suffered from a hernia, it was a small defect, there were indications for surgery.
But my dad always postponed it until later, Dad was afraid of surgeons.
But when I finally decided it was too late, because sooner had already begun to heart problems, and it was a contraindication to performing unnecessary surgeries for not life threatening illness.

Returning to the subject, even when dad was dying would not leave his sense of humor, once he asked during his doctor does when finally kick the bucket does they make him surgery for that damn hernia :mrgreen:

The only downside of my father was that he could not control his temper, easily upset, a little like Dr. House MD :D


My mom thinks I inherited Asperger's syndrome, after my dad.

My mother read some books about Asperger's Syndrome and is confident that he had AS too :D


Your description of your dad reminds me a lot of my dad, who was very intellectual, very precise with his hobby of gardening, and - oh Lordy - did he have a short fuse! I'm pretty sure my dad, had he been analyzed, would have been diagnosed as an Aspie.
As for Poland not knowing what Asperger's was back in the eighties and before - same here in America. I was only diagnosed later in life. Back as a kid, they pigeonholed me as hyperactive because they apparently had no idea how to classify me.


I was classified as ADHD too :D they latter changed that for AS



pawelk1986
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2010
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,903
Location: Wroclaw, Poland

30 Nov 2015, 2:59 am

Edenthiel wrote:
Why is everyone using the past tense? It's not like the 1920's Buck v. Bell ruling (that it's okay to sterilize disabled people) has been overturned.

During a period of four years (2006-2010 at least 148 women at the California Institution for Women in Corona and Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla, CA were given tubal ligations. They were coerced by doctors who failed to explain the medical intricacies of the surgeries they were about to undergo. Each prison surgery requires medical oversight by a review committee, something that did not happen during those four years.
http://cironline.org/reports/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval-4917

Also, 24 European countries - and more than half of the United States - force trans people to agree to sterilization before they can legally transition to their identified gender.


But the sex-change operation inevitably involves sterilization.
Sex can be changed, but you can not have a fully functional sexual organs of the opposite sex, medicine is not that advanced yet.



Edenthiel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Sep 2014
Age: 58
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,820
Location: S.F Bay Area

30 Nov 2015, 3:04 pm

pawelk1986 wrote:
Edenthiel wrote:
Why is everyone using the past tense? It's not like the 1920's Buck v. Bell ruling (that it's okay to sterilize disabled people) has been overturned.

During a period of four years (2006-2010 at least 148 women at the California Institution for Women in Corona and Valley State Prison for Women in Chowchilla, CA were given tubal ligations. They were coerced by doctors who failed to explain the medical intricacies of the surgeries they were about to undergo. Each prison surgery requires medical oversight by a review committee, something that did not happen during those four years.
http://cironline.org/reports/female-inmates-sterilized-california-prisons-without-approval-4917

Also, 24 European countries - and more than half of the United States - force trans people to agree to sterilization before they can legally transition to their identified gender.


But the sex-change operation inevitably involves sterilization.
Sex can be changed, but you can not have a fully functional sexual organs of the opposite sex, medicine is not that advanced yet.

Not all cisgender people have "fully functional" organs, especially in the second half of their lives or before puberty. Yet we respect and acknowledge their sex/gender identities.

People are not their genitals. Some trans people don't life-or-death *need* that particular surgery to live comfortably (or comfortably enough) as themselves. Some simply cannot afford it. Some cannot have it done for medical reasons. Some don't want it because it's not "perfect enough" and they hope in ten years it will be better. Yet, in those states and countries, they are not allowed to have their legal ID updated without surgery. They are outed and mistreated because of it, and far too often abused, beat or killed because of other people's transphobia (and some commit suicide due to how they are treated). So they are forced by the state to have to make what is for them a terrible choice, and that is unethical.

If you'd like to discuss it further, we could start a new thread? I just wanted to bring to people's attention that coerced/forced sterilization still happens today, under a variety of different excuses.


_________________
“For small creatures such as we the vastness is bearable only through love.”
―Carl Sagan