I did read all the comments, and they're not all off-the-wall.
I do agree that the State needs to cough up some reparation to people who had their reproductive choice taken away without their consent, just to emphasize the fact that the State does NOT have the right to do that, and will not be allowed to get away with it.
In truth, I would like to see a Constitutional amendment declaring the inalienable right of an individual to sovereignity over his or her own body. This would cover a lot of things: a person's right to have sex with or marry any other consenting adult; to have children or not; to take drugs or seek alternative health care as one chooses; to be protected against forced drugging, involuntary commitment and other detention without due process, and the use of torture and restraint.
However, I would also like to see nice clean clinics all over the world, paying $100 (or the local equivalent) to every person 18 or over who walks in (alone) and signs up for a vasectomy or Essure: no questions asked, procedure is permanent, patient waives all right to sue later for any reason: take it or leave it.
Overpopulation is the real root of all our troubles on this planet. Seven billion of us now, and if we don't reduce that number by fair and humane means, the Four Horsemen of Human Evolution will be along presently to do the job, as they have always done. Very stupid to let that happen: the incalculable suffering, the destruction, waste and loss of both natural resources and the fruits of human endeavor, the irreplaceable loss of genes from our gene pool.
People have no idea how important it is for us as a species to maintain our genetic diversity; how fragile it actually is: any two different breeds of dog are genetically more different than any two humans. From a eugenic point of view, the very best thing we could do for ourselves would be for women to have no more than two children apiece, but to have them by men as genetically different from themselves as possible, and preferably not the same father for both children. That would stir around the gene pool so as to preserve as much of it as possible while our population dwindled. Unfortunately, people in general are unlikely to go for it.
It's as wrong to forbid people to have children, as it is to force them to have them. However, a lot fewer children per generation is essential. Therefore, I say cut to the chase; just offer people cash up front to not breed, and let them choose for themselves.
Or for others, a lower amount for some method such as an IUD, which could be removed if she changes her mind. Just making pregnancy a conscious decision that requires a little bit of planning would make a big difference.
Actually Brazil had quite a big effect not by paying women to be sterilized, but just by letting it be free and easy (obsteticians were including it as part of delivery if requested). BC pills weren't free, but they were non-prescription and pretty cheap.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
I do agree that the State needs to cough up some reparation to people who had their reproductive choice taken away without their consent, just to emphasize the fact that the State does NOT have the right to do that, and will not be allowed to get away with it.
In truth, I would like to see a Constitutional amendment declaring the inalienable right of an individual to sovereignity over his or her own body. This would cover a lot of things: a person's right to have sex with or marry any other consenting adult; to have children or not; to take drugs or seek alternative health care as one chooses; to be protected against forced drugging, involuntary commitment and other detention without due process, and the use of torture and restraint.
However, I would also like to see nice clean clinics all over the world, paying $100 (or the local equivalent) to every person 18 or over who walks in (alone) and signs up for a vasectomy or Essure: no questions asked, procedure is permanent, patient waives all right to sue later for any reason: take it or leave it.
Overpopulation is the real root of all our troubles on this planet. Seven billion of us now, and if we don't reduce that number by fair and humane means, the Four Horsemen of Human Evolution will be along presently to do the job, as they have always done. Very stupid to let that happen: the incalculable suffering, the destruction, waste and loss of both natural resources and the fruits of human endeavor, the irreplaceable loss of genes from our gene pool.
People have no idea how important it is for us as a species to maintain our genetic diversity; how fragile it actually is: any two different breeds of dog are genetically more different than any two humans. From a eugenic point of view, the very best thing we could do for ourselves would be for women to have no more than two children apiece, but to have them by men as genetically different from themselves as possible, and preferably not the same father for both children. That would stir around the gene pool so as to preserve as much of it as possible while our population dwindled. Unfortunately, people in general are unlikely to go for it.
It's as wrong to forbid people to have children, as it is to force them to have them. However, a lot fewer children per generation is essential. Therefore, I say cut to the chase; just offer people cash up front to not breed, and let them choose for themselves.
no subject
no subject
Actually Brazil had quite a big effect not by paying women to be sterilized, but just by letting it be free and easy (obsteticians were including it as part of delivery if requested). BC pills weren't free, but they were non-prescription and pretty cheap.