Divine Trinity
Pugna Vigil
- Mar 20, 2019
- 310
As for forcing people into sexual acts against their will, or at best, consent, here's a women explaing why rape is bad.
and:
and:
Attachments
Last edited:
Severen
Enlightened
- Jun 30, 2018
- 1,819
Rape has no place in this debate and the United Nations Genocide Convention is just more opinions from human beings. Just like the Geneva Conventions. According to your logic, a police officer shooting a serial killer is rape because it is someone forcing their will in a physical way on another person's body. You can say the same about people who are arrested, imprisoned etc or basically anything that is physically done to a criminal or an enemy combatant in a war zone... Do you have any logic and facts to convince me why everyone having the freedom to bring life into this world is a good thing or at least the lesser evil than some people being prevented from bringing people into this world who are doomed to nothing but misery and prevented from creating and preserving an Idiocracy which also results in misery on a global scale? I can actually come up with more reasons why everyone having the freedom to have children is one of the worst things for humanity. Have you read about Henry Lee Lucas?
Last edited:
Divine Trinity
Pugna Vigil
- Mar 20, 2019
- 310
I disagree, and you've entirely missed the point of me bringing it up. The root of the many problems with involuntary sterilization is it infringes on the person's right of autonomy, you don't seem fond of history or human rights but reread the Natural Law piece. The violation of autonomy for sexual, racial (below), political, and idealogical reasons along with the fundamental disregard of natural processes makes what you're advocating for worse than an act of aggression.
In practice, minorities in every country who are historically impoverished for mostly economic and political purposes will be more likely to face persecution via sterilization. "Mental Illness" lacks any credible scientific data to support it exist, let alone solely from genetics. And not all "disabilities" are an impairment or inheritable. Lactose intolerance is considered a medical condition, despite all the evidence showing mammals cease to, and, don't need to produce lactose after weaning. Therefore the genetic mutation allowing a minority of people to continue consumption of breast milk makes them the "defective" ones. How many so-called disorders similar to lactose intolerance exist?
You seem to prioritize unborn infants over currently living people, which undermines your proclaimed desire of limiting human suffering by causing irreperable suffering of one group for the benefit of another. Not to mention the non-existant line of ethics for eugenics. If forcing major sugery on a mass of people is acceptable, what's to stop us from slaughtering them, rape, or subject them to human experimentation, use as slaves, or harvest their organs? There are benefactors to all of these morally repugnant practices and acts too.
Not to mention the negative environmental effect all those abandoned city and towns would have on the ecosystem.
