Posted on 06/17/2010 9:24:04 AM PDT by Avoiding_Sulla
OK, will the offer more likely be accepted by libertine liberal men? Or maybe sensitive, caring, big-city sophisticates (i.e., liberal men)? As long as the gun-toting, God-fearing “bitter religious clinger” guys eschew the offer, maybe we’ll be ascendant sooner than I hoped.
You don’t see what is the nib of the problem>? By being too accepting of such a program rhema we undercut future efforts at being forced to it.
Here are 3 comments from the link that may make my point better than I ever could. Be careful what you wish for as you may get it, but with a twist.
“Should be mandatory for republicans.”
Jun. 17, 2010 5:45am EST | from nemesis
“nemesis, LMAO what you wrote is just too funny but you have a point there.”
Jun. 17, 2010 7:32am EST | from chezgirl
“To be honest a program like this should be for all throughout this country. You should have to prove that you can support (financially and emotionally) to have children obtain a license and then have surgery to re-connect your jewels or have the contraceptive device removed. There is a lot of entitlement here where blame placed on only a specific type of race or culture but the fact is we all have our village idiots that should not be allowed to procreate. I know here comes the B-ing about human rights. Well I have the right for my tax money to go to programs that help those who at least try to help themselves and here is another right survival of the fittest those who can afford to be fit live and if you can’t afford to live then what good are you? “
Jun. 17, 2010 9:29am EST | from Lettusbee
Freepmail wagglebee to subscribe or unsubscribe from the moral absolutes ping list.
FreeRepublic moral absolutes keyword search
Uh, why would ‘educated and responsible’ people decline a free vasectomy. ;)
“By being too accepting of such a program rhema we undercut future efforts at being forced to it.”
This, for people with disabilities is the primary fear. If a program is funded and voluntary it will eventually become mandatory for wards of the state. Bank on it.
Clearer: By being too accepting of such a program rhema we undercut the moral standing of our posterity when later any would protest at being forced to submit to it.
Statist thought is catching hold. What is that? Humans being treated worse than cattle: the historical trend is allowing humanity fewer rights.
I know. I was trying to be a facetious wiseacre, but I really wouldn’t acquiesce to it or support it no matter who’s getting snipped.
Have you been to Marion County?
You bet I'm gonna die happy. I'm a 42 y/o. average looking, half bald, 3/4 fat guy and she is a 23 y/o bombshell. Now I know there is a God who likes me. And yes, I thank him daily. :-)
Oh, thank you for clearing that up. In the 8 years I’ve been minding this list, I’ve rarely felt so alone.
As you can see from the rest of the thread, there are many here who would take your comment as received wisdom not sarcastic wiseacredom. ;)
No, really, the problem is diverting God’s stated purpose for life!
.
““By being too accepting of such a program rhema we undercut future efforts at being forced to it.”
This, for people with disabilities is the primary fear. If a program is funded and voluntary it will eventually become mandatory for wards of the state. Bank on it. “
But if it were done as a private charity they couldn’t force people into it. They could offer incentives, but there would be no “wards of the state” argument to use as leverage. A private charity could never force someone into it as well as they would be powerless to enforce the foced sterilization of people.
Funny how the libs never like Private Charities, but they prefer the forced charity of state funded programs that unwilling participants known as “tax payers” have to fund under threat of losing everything. That is because Liberals have a bad habit of projecting their bad behavior onto others. “They don’t give to charities so why should anyone else?” , their own twisted thinking goes. They want to acheive their goals, but they don’t want to pay for it, they want YOU to pay for it and that is what makes them so dangerous.
“No, really, the problem is diverting God’s stated purpose for life! “
Would you support the big governmental mechanism required to prevent other people from getting sterilized voluntarily? Do you suggest a ban on all birth control?
it is only fair that you inform your girlfriend. She should know that you will not be able to provide children. Then she can make her choice.
Get real grace!
We’re talking about a government program to prevent life. Where in the constitution is government empowered to prevent life?
We don’t need bans, we need some common sense from government.
.
I wish they had a similar program for women, there are quite a few "breeders" out there that should be stopped.
After a few kids, if you are a perpetual welfare mom, or a dad that has impregnated multiple women, I have no problem requesting sterilization (not forcing, but volunteering)
“This, for people with disabilities is the primary fear. If a program is funded and voluntary it will eventually become mandatory for wards of the state.”
.
Without a doubt!
Have you ever noticed that tv programs in this country are devoid of amputees, paraplegics, or other ‘different’ people being shown as a part of everyday life?
There seems to be a consious effort to keep tv programming “clensed” of anything but a carefully portrayed “reality.”
.
She doesn’t want kids. She is gonna turn into one of those crazy cat ladies when she gets older.
“Get real grace!
We’re talking about a government program to prevent life. Where in the constitution is government empowered to prevent life?
We don’t need bans, we need some common sense from government.
.”
Government Programs = Bad
Private Programs = Good
Even if you don’t agree with what a private program may be doing as long as it doesn’t infringe upon a person’s life.
Do you agree with this?
“Yeah, kind of like neutering the neighborhood dog, that populates the area. If it cuts down on unwanted pregnancies (and subsequent welfare moms) I am all for it.
I wish they had a similar program for women, there are quite a few “breeders” out there that should be stopped.
After a few kids, if you are a perpetual welfare mom, or a dad that has impregnated multiple women, I have no problem requesting sterilization (not forcing, but volunteering) “
Next to eliminating Welfare alltogether, I think the government should only support no more than two kids. ie. Replacement Rate Welfare. If they have any more kids it is up to them to support them. Idealy I would like to see welfare end.
I think it should be legal for a private charity to be setup to pay men and women a reward to undergo surgical sterilization. The only thing stopping them is those damn soul sucking lawyers. After the first preganacy after someone was “sterilized” and it can happen, as it isn’t 100%, you can bet you bottom dollar the lawyers would circle the place like vultures. Legal protection for the charity must be that they have to sign a form or multiple forms to ensure that this is not 100% and clearing the charity of liability for undesired outcome, etc etc.....
Of course the libs love the government programs because you can’t sue the government and expect to win, unlike a private organisation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.