4 ms·

The main issue here for me is, "who turns it back on", and in what circumstances will they/won't they do it? People have a right to make their own reproductive

The main issue here for me is, "who turns it back on", and in what circumstances will they/won't they do it? People have a right to make their own reproductive choices, but there's a huge human, social, and economic cost when people have children at ill-advised points in their life (either too young, when sick, when poor), and it seems that relying on others to enable your reproductive rights is a hazard where the government or medical profession can remove that right from people. I don't really consider this strictly eugenics, as it's not done with the same intention of improving the global genepool, but instead it attacks it from a more shortsighted and "pragmatic" (economic/social) point of view, but in any case it would be a horrible future.

CaptSpify 10y ago
I completely agree, that's why I said I wouldn't trust most countries to enact it properly. I think if done right it could be a good solution, I just don't think it would be a good solution. There's too much potential for abuse.
- serge2k 10y ago
  You could solve the moral issues by letting people just go get the birth control applied when they want to. Why force them to partake, and open up the easiest route for a government to screw with probably our most basic right.
  - CaptSpify 10y ago
    I think we should let people do that currently. My issue with the current way things are, though, is that the default is fertility. I know many people who had kids before they were ready, because it was unplanned. I'd argue that it's more moral to prevent unplanned pregnancies, but give people the choice to become fertile whenever they want. > Why force them to partake, and open up the easiest route for a government to screw with probably our most basic right. If you read my above comments: That's why, even though I wish we could implement it, I probably wouldn't support it if it was an available option. I don't trust any government to do it correctly.
- phil21 10y ago
  The solution is actually really simple. You sterilize at birth, and then once a child reaches the age of majority they are allowed to get it reversed at zero cost simply be requesting it be done. This removes the moral hazard, and requires a positive action and conscious choice to have a child. At that point you can start making moral judgements and holding people accountable.

CaptSpify 10y ago

I completely agree, that's why I said I wouldn't trust most countries to enact it properly. I think if done right it could be a good solution, I just don't think it would be a good solution. There's too much potential for abuse.

serge2k 10y ago
You could solve the moral issues by letting people just go get the birth control applied when they want to. Why force them to partake, and open up the easiest route for a government to screw with probably our most basic right.
- CaptSpify 10y ago
  I think we should let people do that currently. My issue with the current way things are, though, is that the default is fertility. I know many people who had kids before they were ready, because it was unplanned. I'd argue that it's more moral to prevent unplanned pregnancies, but give people the choice to become fertile whenever they want. > Why force them to partake, and open up the easiest route for a government to screw with probably our most basic right. If you read my above comments: That's why, even though I wish we could implement it, I probably wouldn't support it if it was an available option. I don't trust any government to do it correctly.
phil21 10y ago
The solution is actually really simple. You sterilize at birth, and then once a child reaches the age of majority they are allowed to get it reversed at zero cost simply be requesting it be done. This removes the moral hazard, and requires a positive action and conscious choice to have a child. At that point you can start making moral judgements and holding people accountable.