4 ms·

Genocide is the killing of men who are currently alive. If one can say that one can kill a man who has not yet been conceived, by stopping his hypothetical fut

Genocide is the killing of men who are currently alive. If one can say that one can kill a man who has not yet been conceived, by stopping his hypothetical future birth, then every form of contraception is murder, nay, the simple election not to have sex or otherwise procreate is then murder.

croissants 6y ago
Do you not see the difference between forced sterilization (removing a person's ability to procreate) and contraception (giving a person the ability to have sex without procreating, which they can choose to change later)?
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  Of course I do, simply not by the argument that forced sterilization is genocide, an argument which necessitate that one can “kill” a not yet existing man by stopping his future existence. The argument of genocide of course does not imply that the man who is sterilized is killed so long as he be allowed to live after the sterilization, but rather that his future, hypothetical offspring is, because it would now never come to be. The comparison I made was with forced foreskin removal and forced dental correction, something that can also not be undone.
xxpor 6y ago
The UN definition of genocide, note point D: any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.
- Blikkentrekker 6y ago
  Then I see nothing wrong with genocide per sē if (d) fall under it, for by this definition, the Dutch goverment's plan to hand out free condoms to teenagers is a form of genocide, as it is a measure intended to stop births within the group of Dutchmen. As usual, U.N. definitions are made without much thought, and quickly lead to the absurd when being held to even the slightest of inspection — it is almost as if it be a forum of very emotional men, who put very little thought into what they are doing. If we say that stopping future births rather is problematic, then most forms of sex education are problematic.
  - tsimionescu 6y ago
    > the Dutch goverment's plan to hand out free condoms to teenagers is a form of genocide, as it is a measure intended to stop births within the group of Dutchmen. That would be perhaps true if the Dutch government were planning to give out free condoms only to white people or only to black people or only to blonds or only to christians etc. If they are universally giving out condoms, then they are obviously not trying to destroy any particular ethnic or national group inside their own country - the obvious limit to the UN definition.
    - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
      Say a proof of citizenship be required. Then they are only giving them out to the “ethnicity” called “the Dutchman”. But this another matter of why I'm never very impressed with any definition that names the pseudoscientific concept of “ethnicity” — it is of course entirely an arbitrary thing what is and isn't classified as a separate “ethnicity” much like how the difference between a dialect and a separate language is of course one of politics, not science. If only the province of Frisia were to have a plan for handing out such condoms, would that qualify as genocide of the Frisians then, which some claim is a different ethnicity for historical reasons? Are the inhabitants of each city perhaps a different ethnicity?
      - ceejayoz 6y ago

croissants 6y ago

Do you not see the difference between forced sterilization (removing a person's ability to procreate) and contraception (giving a person the ability to have sex without procreating, which they can choose to change later)?

Blikkentrekker 6y ago
Of course I do, simply not by the argument that forced sterilization is genocide, an argument which necessitate that one can “kill” a not yet existing man by stopping his future existence. The argument of genocide of course does not imply that the man who is sterilized is killed so long as he be allowed to live after the sterilization, but rather that his future, hypothetical offspring is, because it would now never come to be. The comparison I made was with forced foreskin removal and forced dental correction, something that can also not be undone.

xxpor 6y ago

The UN definition of genocide, note point D: any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such: (a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Blikkentrekker 6y ago
Then I see nothing wrong with genocide per sē if (d) fall under it, for by this definition, the Dutch goverment's plan to hand out free condoms to teenagers is a form of genocide, as it is a measure intended to stop births within the group of Dutchmen. As usual, U.N. definitions are made without much thought, and quickly lead to the absurd when being held to even the slightest of inspection — it is almost as if it be a forum of very emotional men, who put very little thought into what they are doing. If we say that stopping future births rather is problematic, then most forms of sex education are problematic.
- tsimionescu 6y ago
  > the Dutch goverment's plan to hand out free condoms to teenagers is a form of genocide, as it is a measure intended to stop births within the group of Dutchmen. That would be perhaps true if the Dutch government were planning to give out free condoms only to white people or only to black people or only to blonds or only to christians etc. If they are universally giving out condoms, then they are obviously not trying to destroy any particular ethnic or national group inside their own country - the obvious limit to the UN definition.
  - Blikkentrekker 6y ago
    Say a proof of citizenship be required. Then they are only giving them out to the “ethnicity” called “the Dutchman”. But this another matter of why I'm never very impressed with any definition that names the pseudoscientific concept of “ethnicity” — it is of course entirely an arbitrary thing what is and isn't classified as a separate “ethnicity” much like how the difference between a dialect and a separate language is of course one of politics, not science. If only the province of Frisia were to have a plan for handing out such condoms, would that qualify as genocide of the Frisians then, which some claim is a different ethnicity for historical reasons? Are the inhabitants of each city perhaps a different ethnicity?
    - ceejayoz 6y ago