Do I think people with drug addictions should have children? No.
But I do think sterilization should be an individual's choice. If the government wants to offer to pay for sterilization procedures for people who aren't in a position to raise children, I'm not against that. If someone recognizes that they do not want to have children and are unable to care for a child if they were to get pregnant, then it would probably be a good thing to have that option available. But I think that a better way of dealing with this would be to have free birth control options, perhaps the birth control shot or IUDs, or something that is otherwise reversible. Just because someone has a drug addiction does not mean that they won't ever overcome that addiction. They may eventually lead a sober life and be in a position where they want to have children and are able to support and be a good parent to their children.
As for people with disabilities, there is a wide range of things that we consider a "disability" and a wide range in how debilitating a particular disability can be. I think there's a grey area in deciding whether or not someone's disability will make them unable to care for a child. In fact, there's a lot of people who don't have a recognized disability but who seem incapable of raising children. I don't think that someone who is unable to take care of themself should have children, but again, I think there are reversible (and preferably noninvasive) options that can be discussed with the individual and/or their caretakers.
I agree but I don't think it's harsh at all. It's not fair for the child to be given birth to by a drug addict at all. They're born and automatically addicted to drugs. I was watching this one program on A&E and his mom was a hardcore crack and cocaine addict and he was born with an addiction to the drugs and the he was already going through withdrawal the very first day of his life. It was so sad to watch and I started crying. I think it's cruel and completely irresponsible to do that to a child. And I do think that disabled children should be sterilized because in all honesty, I don't see how they can raise a child. Chances are the offspring will also be disabled too and how can a disabled parent raise another child let alone a disabled one?
I think free sterilization should be available for people who want it. I don't think anyone should be forced to get sterilized, but it's safer and cheaper than the alternatives.
Personally I'd like to control the world, but then I think, I wouldn't like the world controlling me if I had differing views on life from it?
So, it leaves me torn:
My instinct is to agree that people who are proven bad parents (uncaring, unloving, unnurturing, violent, abusive) should be smoted and smoted good! Made to go through all the pain and horrors they inflict themselves *ahem* lol.
Then, am I any better than them by thinking that way? Did they become bad parents because of society? Is the gap between the rich and the poor leading to these people being the way they are and are the people "with" responsible for the outlook of the people "without"?
I don't know!
Therefore I have to say, No. People should be allowed to be who they are, for better or for worse (but everyone should be allowed to be who they are and that means stopping any person oppressing another).
So, children should be given rights and protections under law which they have a right to claim. Who knows, maybe the worst potential parent might make the most loving? This way we know and people have rights.
Some thoughts.
I oppose abortion except where carrying a baby to term will be fatal or substantially permanently disabling to the mother.
I believe there is a valid argument for women who derive open ended support for them and dependent children from government should be required to accept contraceptive implants, but neither permanent surgical nor chemical sterilization, while they are on welfare.
I believe anyone living in government supplied housing should accept the implants as well as mandatory STD, HIV and drug testing.
I believe anyone with certain disabling genetic diseases such as Downs or Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis should be sterilized.
Can't comment on the human rights aspect of these or how they stack up with the US Constitution, but if I were Dictator...
"I believe anyone living in government supplied housing should accept the implants as well as mandatory STD, HIV and drug testing." I can understand an argument for mandatory contraceptive implants and drug testing, in the sense that if you're relying on government assistance, you're not really in a financial position to be having children or using money for drugs, but I'm curious to know where mandatory STD and HIV testing fits in.
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
What's Your Opinion? Sign Up Now!I think guys should be injected with something in their penis from birth that makes them sterile and then to have babies you would need a special license and only then you get another injection that makes you sterile again.
World would be a better place.
Not JUST sterilizing.
I think that a person should be sterilized AND castrated by the government WITHOUT A CONSENT if the person is convicted of REPEATED sexual abuse and/or rape of any person of any gender and any age.
I should be stterilized! But that stupid organization/charity won't do it because I'm not an addict. I would even get money for it! What could be better than that?
Torture, far as I'm concerned.
Yes.
There are many to whom I believe we should offer incentives for sterilization.
There are others whom I believe should be summarily and permanently sterilized.
Hell yeah. some people are nothing more than a waste of oxygen and should not reproduce. the first five minutes of the movie idiocracy pretty much summs up my answer to this.
In some cases yes...Fathers of many children should be sterilized..Male sex criminals should be sterilized ...Certain STDs should be sterilized...sex also then should be prohibited by all these individuals...If you commit a sex crime you lose your right to sex!
> Fathers of many children should be sterilized Why? > Male sex criminals should be sterilized Why only the males? > Certain STDs should be sterilized That doesn't even begin to make sense. Unless you refer to PEOPLE with certain STDs, in which case it seems counter productive; now they can have sex without risk of pregnancy yay. > If you commit a sex crime you lose your right to sex! In some places urinating in public is considered a 'sex crime'.
This is correct...if you urinate in public as an adult male you should be a sex criminal and lose rights to sex.....STDs You should not be allowed to spread your diseases...Men that are deadbeat dads should be sterilized,,yep...you mess up you LOSE your rights FOREVER!!
Hmmmm...well, at least they don't lost their right to beat off
Sexual Relationships 
Sexual Health 
Most Helpful Girls